Sammy Sofa

Hub Arkush is the absolute worst: http://chicagofootball.com/2015/05/25/hub-arkush-chicago-bears-had-no-choice-but-to-release-ray-mcdonald/a5vwhp6/

No offense intended, but is tinkertini26 a real person? It's seems like they're either always last or damn near last for the last few years.

[glow=red]FDB[/glow]

Hmmmmmm. Drop Cano Add Headley

The stat is stupid and pointless. What's its actual purpose? Yeah, it's not like it's on the level of things like batting average or even RBI's, which are misused but are still actually telling you something and have some value. Pitching W/L basically tells you nothing.

this is such a weird crusade you're on it's not happening any time soon lol http://cdn1.theodysseyonline.com/files/2015/03/22/63562597142357063586824919_qaqUHe7Yq-Djsw_P4PVpgLV_GPntxD-yrGsYK3UgmzJL3jJ96l7ia2e8x7wb0Ks4MMGT1MqP8i7gPs03n95fCMgcaf9LkKU-1HNZUZ5GattfyrDj3pMcJ3P8TUTNspAs_f-P4VE

YES.

GIVE US SCHWARBER.

Those were quotes from when he signed in March. Holllllllllllly [expletive], how did I miss that. This team can seriously go off and [expletive] itself. I hope they have a piddling season that results in a shitty draft pick.

At least half of the lineup is made up of garbage people at any given moment; the rest is made up of babies and Rizzo and Fowler, and almost everyone strikes out a ton. I think expecting them to regularly be offensive juggernauts at this point is jumping the gun just a wee bit.

Just move him down in the lineup.

A handsome, terrible man.

No, no; he's about to be traded because Schwarber is coming up. Spread the word.

Yeah, looks like it. And for a second I couldn't see the ump at all in the top pic, and everything seemed so much better.

Is he still standing closer to the plate?

And that's pretty much it. I'm not some baseball savant who knows what Baez will be; I just know I'm not a big fan of his due to strikeout issues and I think even if he pans out as a ML starter he's not going to be anywhere near the levels people were breathlessly talking about him maybe being at. That said, a lot of people a lot smarter than me still think he can turn overcome (or at least minimize) his flaws enough to became a really valuable player. There's a still a ton of temptation to pick up a player like him. I would just prefer another team take that chance instead of the Cubs.

Think of Baez as the "first" piece in the deal if it helps you process it better. He just sits in a nebulous spot value-wise where on his own he's probably too scary, but combined correctly his monster potential could probably get a team a lot in return.

I actually agree with a lot of this, which is why I think the best use of him in a trade would be as A big piece as opposed to being THE big piece. On his own the risk is too high to really bring something gamechanging, but the appeal of what he could be if he actually clicks would make him an insanely appealing asset in a big trade. Given them the less spectacular with a higher floor gets you an OK return; that player + Baez gets you gold, Jerry, GOLD. It's like trying to sell someone a car and instead of trying to win them over with a bunch of add-ons you're like, "ah, [expletive] it, you get the hover-tires. Sure, there's a good chance they'll fail and you'll die, but if they work you can FLY." you know, this used to be jon voight's javi baez. I'm going to compare these bite marks to the ones on this bison dog.

I actually agree with a lot of this, which is why I think the best use of him in a trade would be as A big piece as opposed to being THE big piece. On his own the risk is too high to really bring something gamechanging, but the appeal of what he could be if he actually clicks would make him an insanely appealing asset in a big trade. Given them the less spectacular with a higher floor gets you an OK return; that player + Baez gets you gold, Jerry, GOLD. It's like trying to sell someone a car and instead of trying to win them over with a bunch of add-ons you're like, "ah, [expletive] it, you get the hover-tires. Sure, there's a good chance they'll fail and you'll die, but if they work you can FLY."

yes, based purely on his defense. his offense was bad. i don't see why it's lazy to compare him to other players who were bad in their first stint against mlb pitching. yes, baez was especially abysmal, but we already knew that his risk profile was much higher. he'll probably end up not being good. but it's possible that he ends up being really good. i can't really say what "selling high" on him would be, because i'm not sure how other clubs will value him. he can rebuild his value above where it was after last season, but it's never going to be higher than it was before he was called up, at least until he actually shows he can face major league pitching without striking out half the time. But that's actually where he is similar to Rizzo; teams are going to still be willing to go in big for him if he keeps mashing and being more patient in the minors. They'll be willing to take that chance because of the expectations/hopes for what he can be. Plus I disagree that the highest time to sell on him was before when he was first called up; you could argue it's higher if he keeps improving in the minors since it could be looked at/hoped that he went through a good chunk of his major league growing pains already. And it's lazy to just point to someone like Rizzo and Trout and say, "see? He can be fixed!" when basically all they have in common is they weren't as good as anyone wanted in their first go around. It would hold a lot more weight if you point to players who have similar skills/flaws/results as Baez and then succeeded after initially floundering. He just doesn't seem very similar to Rizzo or Trout at all.

If we're talking about Soriano in his prime, there probably isn't a position player prospect on earth whose team wouldn't be thrilled to death if they ended up that. No, I'm talking Alfonso Soriano, very streaky monster-hitter. I doubt Baez would have the SB numbers that gave Soriano his best player ratings; better defensively, but Soriano really only had one truly bad defensive season during his peak years (2002-2008). So like I said, would be perfectly fine if Baez panned out a la Soriano with the bat, but I think if moved at the right time he could net the Cubs something even better.

And hyperbole aside, I don't think it's the end of the world if the Cubs hold on to him; personally, I think he'd end up being a Soriano-esque player, which I'm more than happy to have. That said, I think the potential that so many people are enamored with plus what he's done in the minors could very realistically make him the main part of a deal that could bring back a player that would be even more valuable than what I think Baez is likely to pan out as.

Trading high isn't "burying a guy." Holding up other player's unsuccessful first go-arounds never fails to be way too simplistic. And now we've gone from just lazily using Rizzo in that example to also inexplicably using Mike Trout, too? Mike Trout, who manged to be a 0.7 WAR player in 40 games at 19-years-old.

so you think javy is a 22 year old AAAA player? i have a hard time believing AAAA players are a thing (barring like guys who have played at AAA for years and years and are dominating it in their late 20s), especially 22 year old ones. I just think the scenario I presented is very humorous. Personally, I don't think Baez' actual output will match or top what they could get in return if they move him at the right time in the right deal.

You do realize that trading him when the thing you're named after isn't particularly high doesn't really make much sense, right? Terrible trade speculation by hack baseball writers doesn't mean that actual GM's don't notice how he's struggled this year or two season ago. He's not somehow damaging the team, so hopefully they just move him down in the lineup for the time being.