Sammy Sofa

Hopefully he strangles Quade. For all we know Dempster requested Hill instead of Castillo. Dempster isn't the manager. No, but he is the starting pitcher today and outside of his last two starts he's been struggling. He might just feel he has a better rapport or whatever with Hill and asked for him to catch for him.

Given the general lack of offense in baseball this year, I think Beltran's price could be pretty high for a one year rental. Right. We have no idea which teams are going to be in the hunt around the deadline and someone like Beltran could still command a pretty high price for just half a season if he continues being hot. Sure, if he could be had for a song because of money issues, great, why not? But I seriously doubt that will be the case, and even if it is it's just going to increase the competition between the offers to get him.

The difference of opinion is simple: he feels the Cubs have a shot at competing this year if they get a significant upgrade at one position. You don't. Hence the varying perspectives. If I felt the Cubs were one piece away AND I thought Beltran would stay healthy all year, I'd probably feel the same way. However, until I see some power from ARam, I don't think we're only missing one piece. It still doesn't make any sense. I'm certainly not opposed to making a go at competing in a weak division this season (though I agree it would take more than one player unless Aramis AND Soto rebound), but I can't figure out why he would want to go after Beltran of all people instead of attempting something Garza-esque where you shell out for a player that can help now and in the future. I dont want to part with a Garza-esque prospect package. I would only really want to go after Beltran if it were a more reasonable price. Of course if King Felix were to become available, Id be willing to part with alot more. You part with a Garza-esque prospect-package to get what you pay for; a player much more along the lines of what the Cubs need right now as opposed to a half-season rental. Beltran would "cost" less than Garza because you're only getting him for half a season, though the Mets are still going to demand a decent return because of his value and the position they're in needing to build for the future ASAP. The Cubs wouldn't be able to get him for peanuts.

Why are you assuming Byrd and Soto are going to start hitting for significantly more power if Aramis doesn't? And the only "real problem" you see with trading for Beltran is figuring out what to do with Byrd or Fukudome? Really?

Hopefully he strangles Quade. For all we know Dempster requested Hill instead of Castillo.

The difference of opinion is simple: he feels the Cubs have a shot at competing this year if they get a significant upgrade at one position. You don't. Hence the varying perspectives. If I felt the Cubs were one piece away AND I thought Beltran would stay healthy all year, I'd probably feel the same way. However, until I see some power from ARam, I don't think we're only missing one piece. It still doesn't make any sense. I'm certainly not opposed to making a go at competing in a weak division this season (though I agree it would take more than one player unless Aramis AND Soto rebound), but I can't figure out why he would want to go after Beltran of all people instead of attempting something Garza-esque where you shell out for a player that can help now and in the future.

I am baffled as to how you think is this a good idea. The whole first paragraph was, quite honestly, nonsense. Because we don't know which prospects will pan out, or if the Cubs will be able to sign any good FA's, they should inexplicably waste resources on an old Beltran for half of a season? FTH?

In the dugout.

Again, you're inexplicably focused on this year like it's something that needs to bolstered. It's not. "Holes" can easily refer to the key positions that need to be filled next year with Pena and Fukudome gone and a good chance that Aramis is bought out. That's 3 key positions the Cubs need to fill, and trading away valuable pieces (be they players of the future for the Cubs or parts in much more valuable trades) for half a season of Carols Beltran doesn't make any sense whatsoever.

I am baffled as to how you think this is a good idea. Beltran is old, and while he would likely be a nice bump this year he should have absolutely no roll in the Cubs' future. He's still a very useful player for the right team, so it's not like the Mets are just going to give him up for the hypothetical peanuts deal you think the Cubs could get away with. When the Mets trade him, and if they trade Wright and/or Reyes, it's going to be them asking for players that are potentially going to be able to help the rebuild, not swapping expiring contracts. It's a waste of resources to go after Beltran when the Cubs are fielding a very mediocre team. He's not going to put them over the top. And why do you keep insisting on listing Wood if the Cubs were to go into fire sale mode? Even if they did they wouldn't move Wood. It's obvious he was signed at a drastically reduced rate so he could retire as a Cub. It's ridiculous to think they're going to deep-six that and trade him even if he was having a great year come the deadline.

Cowherd being Cowherd and making [expletive] up.

But if we could get him as rental in a desperate attempt to make this season count, would you be interested? Not really, since it would likely require giving up too many promising prospects and/or players on the team that could be better dealt for the Cubs' future. I have to disagree. My though all along has been that the main thing that keeps this team back is the lack of that 1 elite hitter, which is what a healthy Beltran would be. That has nothing to with my post, so I don't know what you're disagreeing with. What I'M disagreeing with is needlessly giving up valuable parts for a 1-year rental. It's not like this is a good Cubs team that just needs one part to push it over the top.

.249 .366 .345 .711 against LH starters. Though he's only gotten 5 starts against LH pitchers between this season and last year's, and in 4 starts last year he put up this hilarious line: .344 .447 .688 1.135 with 3 HR and a triple

I'm talking about the general idea that he needs to be out there if they're facing a lefty. I was happy he wasn't out there yesterday, and really only hope he's out there due to the sample size of his matchups against Bumgarner. And people SHOULD have a problem with starting Johnson. He sucks.

Reed Johnson against LH starters in 2010: .250 .289 .358 .647 Against LH starters so far this year: .263 .333 .368 .702 He's useful against lefties coming off the bench, but doesn't really do much to justify automatically getting starts against them.

But if we could get him as rental in a desperate attempt to make this season count, would you be interested? Not really, since it would likely require giving up too many promising prospects and/or players on the team that could be better dealt for the Cubs' future.

And as much as I like Beltran, it doesn't seem too wise to be investing in mid-30's OF if Pujols is going to be the main target if he makes it to FA (though, yes, they could afford both).

Assuming he could stay healthy, he would be the 3 hitter this team so desperately needs. However, that is a big assumption. If The Mets would do it as a salary dump,assuming we have the money Id be all for it, considering this division is still winnable. However, considering Beltrans injury history an the fact that hes a rental, I wouldnt give up too much in prospects. Maybe theyd take Byrd and a few solid but not top prospects plus cash. However, if we were to make such a deal, we may end up scrambling for a RF next year, unless theyre content with some kind of Colvin/Johnson platoon. Also, hasn't Carlos Beltran been proven as a contract year monster? Based on what? http://www.baseball-reference.com/players/b/beltrca01.shtml

Pretty much. I've been very vocal about how apprehensive about them facing the Heat, but if these last two games are the indicators as to what they can pull off going forward they've got this.

That was so much [expletive] fun to watch. BOOZER, BABY.

Meh, even that, chalk me up with ssr. Seems odd to be complaining about Shaq getting too much media attention, especially compared to those two.

Too few walks, too little power, too many crappy Quade lineups...it's a recipe for suck. And seeing as we're coming up on 40 games it's probably not going to get much better.

I think you missed how high that ball hit off the wall. Probably based on how it died in the vines and essentially dropped out.

Why? For playing the ball off the wall when he could have stood back against the wall and reached up to make the catch. Molina just missed a home run. If you're a shaky OF it makes much more sense to play the ball off the wall than making a futile effort to leap into the vines to try and catch it on a really sunny day.

Why?