davearm

Provide some scrutiny that disproves it. I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's. We're talking about a guy with little patience and very little power whose entire game is based on his ability to make contact and run to first. The closest comparable I can think of is Kenny Lofton, but he had more patience and more power. He has stuck around a while, but has been quite inconsistent. Lofton Otis Nixon Ricky Henderson Ozzie Smith Lou Brock Willie Wilson Brett Butler Davey Lopes Omar Vizquel What a terrible attempt to defend your stance. LOL! You said, "I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's." Well now you know of several. Happy to be of service.

I'd sure be curious to hear which 2 or 3 seasons you're tossing out as less than good. His worst season was still worth over 8 wins. That's very good.

Willie McGee (and many others) belong in different category: thin fast guys whose all-around game did indeed deteriorate in their thirties, although the cause of the decline was not really diminished footspeed.

Provide some scrutiny that disproves it. I don't know of any thinly built speedy guys like Ichiro whose game held up throughout their mid 30's. We're talking about a guy with little patience and very little power whose entire game is based on his ability to make contact and run to first. The closest comparable I can think of is Kenny Lofton, but he had more patience and more power. He has stuck around a while, but has been quite inconsistent. Lofton Otis Nixon Ricky Henderson Ozzie Smith Lou Brock Willie Wilson Brett Butler Davey Lopes Omar Vizquel

That's a rather ignorant statement. He is immensly popular in both Seattle and overseas. He's the main reason (in terms of revenue creation) they could afford to ink Sexson and Beltre, and took a run at Schmidt last Winter. His value to that franchise is not based in baseball stats alone. Comparing him to A-Rod - whose "q" rating is well below Ichiro's at this point - is an apples to oranges comparison. Ichiro is a very rare commodity and thus his value cannot be analyzed in typical terms. And even given all of the off-the-field considerations, people are still overlooking the fact that Ichiro has been a consistent 9-10 win player. Guys like that don't exactly grow on trees, folks.

OK, it's time for this misconception to die, right along with "clutch hitter" and "lineup protection". Thinly built, speedy guys like Ichiro tend to age very well. Barring injury, they don't all of a sudden just get slow. Somewhere along the line somebody blurted out this theory, because at a quick glance it might seem commonsensical, and now people just reflexively repeat it and accept it as fact even though it doesn't hold up under scrutiny.

If you could get Pat Gillick to take back Jones, Izturis, and Eyre, plus add enough cash to balance things out both this year and next (which is in the $5M range), then (and only then) does Burrell become a serious consideration. If the cash part doesn't work, then add Blanco too. Maybe Ohman. That gets you somewhere close to a wash. Basically I'd take Burrell if it didn't cost me anything in $$$ or young talent (at least not high-end young talent -- I'd throw in a mid-grade prospect or two).

I'm not sure about that. Of course it depends on who the prospect is. All of the Buerhle rumors had "experts" speculating on Williams only getting a team's top prospect for him. I think it's worth looking into because he's a better fit and much less expensive than many other free agent rentals. Well as you alluded to yourself, the absolute floor on Rowand's value is two draft picks. Two draft picks > a pitching prospect and Scott Eyre.

It's going to be tough to make a good deal this year. Funny, I had the opposite reaction. Olney says the trade value of veterans has plummeted, while the trade value for young players has climbed dramatically -- sounds to me like a buyer's market for veterans, wherein your young players can buy you a lot.

Are the Sox just biding time with WMP, thinking he's their replacement for Manny?

It's not progress if it precludes an acquisition that might actually make a difference. Hendry's not going to trade for Brown and then turn around and trade again for Dunn/Abreu/Dye.

I'd be very surprised to see the Cubs make an inexperienced and unproven rookie (Soto) their primary catcher in the midst of a second-half playoff chase. Cedeno's got a better chance of being handed the everyday SS job, but I'd be skeptical of that happening, too. My gut sense is that at this point the Cubs will stick with what they've got at catcher, and look to upgrade elsewhere... one more bullpen arm at least, and perhaps another bat at SS, CF or RF.

I know a lot of people are worried that the Cubs won't be buyers at the deadline because of the pending sale, but looks like it might be the opposite. Good news for the playoff race. A good article from Bruce. Definitely worth the read. Lots of good stuff in there. I suspected this was the case all along. Hendry's held back some payroll money to work with this year, and there are no higher-ups that will stand in the way of his short-term plan. The big asterisk, though, is that Hendry very likely doesn't have the latitude to acquire players that are signed beyond this season, unless future salaries are somehow balanced out. That'd all but eliminate guys like Griffey, Tejada (a Hendry favorite), and several others.

The most highly optimistic view would be that the Cubs really do value Murton highly, and see them as part of their future, but sent him down for two reasons: 1 - to get consistent ABs, and 2 - to get himself comfortable in RF someplace other than in the bigleagues. Now whether that interpretation has any validity is anyone's guess. But just because a young guy gets sent down, and a lesser player assumes his spot on the big club, doesn't automatically mean that the team doesn't value that young guy. What does Murton need to work on? The idea that RF is *that* much different than left is balderdash. The difference is longer throws to third and a different POV on the game. Murton doesn't have a great arm so he seems more suited to LF. The problem is the Cubs think they need to get a run producer out there. Maybe they do, but they also need guys to get on base too. Although I don't think the Cubs will do it, Soriano seems much more suited for RF and Floyd/Murton seem better suited for LF. I guess they don't want to switch Soriano again. Which brings me to my last point, Murton doesn't really have that much trade value as a stand alone. He's not going to be an elite outfielder and most teams want power from the corners. A team like the A's, Boston, or San Deigo might value Murton's skills but they are not likely to want to give up much to get him. I think the Cubs will have to package Murton with some other talent to get any value for him at all. The fact that you're asking this suggests that maybe you didn't see him playing RF much for the Cubs. He was bad, and looked uncomfortable there. It seemed pretty clear early on that OTJ training with the big club wasn't the most prudent approach to acclimating Murton to RF. I'm sure your eyes never lie. Are they lying in this case? Did the Murton you saw playing RF have nothing to work on?

The most highly optimistic view would be that the Cubs really do value Murton highly, and see them as part of their future, but sent him down for two reasons: 1 - to get consistent ABs, and 2 - to get himself comfortable in RF someplace other than in the bigleagues. Now whether that interpretation has any validity is anyone's guess. But just because a young guy gets sent down, and a lesser player assumes his spot on the big club, doesn't automatically mean that the team doesn't value that young guy. What does Murton need to work on? The idea that RF is *that* much different than left is balderdash. The difference is longer throws to third and a different POV on the game. Murton doesn't have a great arm so he seems more suited to LF. The problem is the Cubs think they need to get a run producer out there. Maybe they do, but they also need guys to get on base too. Although I don't think the Cubs will do it, Soriano seems much more suited for RF and Floyd/Murton seem better suited for LF. I guess they don't want to switch Soriano again. Which brings me to my last point, Murton doesn't really have that much trade value as a stand alone. He's not going to be an elite outfielder and most teams want power from the corners. A team like the A's, Boston, or San Deigo might value Murton's skills but they are not likely to want to give up much to get him. I think the Cubs will have to package Murton with some other talent to get any value for him at all. The fact that you're asking this suggests that maybe you didn't see him playing RF much for the Cubs. He was bad, and looked uncomfortable there. It seemed pretty clear early on that OTJ training with the big club wasn't the most prudent approach to acclimating Murton to RF.

The most highly optimistic view would be that the Cubs really do value Murton highly, and see them as part of their future, but sent him down for two reasons: 1 - to get consistent ABs, and 2 - to get himself comfortable in RF someplace other than in the bigleagues. Now whether that interpretation has any validity is anyone's guess. But just because a young guy gets sent down, and a lesser player assumes his spot on the big club, doesn't automatically mean that the team doesn't value that young guy.

Perhaps that's true. But that doesn't make it the optimal lineup configuration. Soriano - Dunn - Lee - Ramirez - Floyd would probably be the best way to order the top half of a lineup with Dunn added.

People look at the 40 HRs and the power-hitter body and automatically assume Dunn's a middle-of-the-order run producer. He's not. He doesn't put the ball in play nearly enough to drive in the guys on base ahead of him with any sort of consistency. I recently came across a stat called OBI (and OBI%). OBI (Others Batted In) = runs batted in, except for the batter driving himself in via a home run. Equal to RBI-HR. OBI% = the fraction of runners on base who were driven in during a batter's plate appearances. Baseball's elite run producers show OBI%s of around 20%. Numbers in the high teens are good; mid-teens are decent; low teens are below average. Dunn was at 12.7% in 2006 (good for #208 of 256 guys w/ 300+ PAs), and 13.5% in 2005 (187th of 275). Needless to say, that's not the sort of production you want out of your #3/4/5 hitters.

That strikes me as the most plausible explanation, by far.

I think there's at least a fair chance that Williams intends to trade Buehrle regardless, and correctly sees that his trade value goes up significantly if he's under contract for several years at below-market rates. It'd sure be something if Buehrle caves on the NTC, signs the deal now, and then gets dealt in the next 30 days. Of course more likely is that Williams waits a bit and strikes a deal to move him before the 10-5 date.

I don't see John Schuerholz giving Saltalamacchia away for a guy that's highly likely to test free agency in a little over a year. The Braves don't often play the mortgage-the-future-to-win-now game.

I must say I'm digging the Utley + Reyes + 3 stud pitchers formula. I don't think that'd give you the 5 best individual players, but it might just be the best combination of players.

But, if he hadn't given them a stupid contract to begin with, he wouldn't wind up in this position over and over again. Hendry, and Lynch before him, overpay for mediocre players and then have to unload them for peanuts because nobody wants to pay their contracts. He, and Ed Lynch before him, allow rookies to sit on the bench or be yo yoed back and forth from Iowa to the majors until whatever trade value they had as prospects is gone over fear that they will become superstars for someone else. Let's not act as if it wasn't Hendry's fault that he's in the position he's in. Nearly everyone here said the Jones contract was bad when Jones signed it. That's not hindsight. Between Sosa, Patterson, Barrett, and Jones, Jones is the only one you can logically argue Hendry gave a bad contract to. Hendry didn't sign Sosa, Patterson was an arbitration guy, and Barrett's deal turned out to be a real bargain. Regardless, who Hendry has signed, and for how much, is a different discussion altogether from the one we're having here. And by all accounts, Hendry was trying like crazy to move Jones in the offseason, but had no takers then, either. If you made a list of GMs that this statement could apply to, you'd have a pretty lengthy list.

Yeah-he says that the only player the Cubs got back in the Bellhorn, Patterson, Sosa, and Walker deals is Fontenot. However, what he fails to say is that Bellhorn is out of the league, Patterson is the worst OF in the major leagues this year, Walker is out of the league, and Sosa is only back in the league after taking a year off. Two of those players were run out of town because the city hated them (Sosa and Patterson), and the other two are probably the organization's fault, although Walker being in his walk year and not being great last year probably did more to depress his value than anything the club did. His next paragraph is also confusing. Soriano's defense was never the problem-for right or wrong, the Cubs felt it was his offense that was suffering because of the position change, and have not changed in that decision. Pie was not supposed to be up for good the first time he came up, so I do not know why the writer would say that the Cubs determined he was ready and then decided he wasn't ready. For all the problems in the article, the overall point is true. The Cubs try one thing, and then at the first sign of trouble move on to the next thing. They need to be more patient overall if they plan to have sustained success. The author makes a very good point, he just doesn't use great examples to support it. Of course that begs the question, how much patience is appropriate? When does watching the same guy make the same mistakes again and again morph from "being patient" into "refusing to admit a problem"?

This thread is hilarious. Absolutely hilarious. People bashing Hendry for selling low. Seems to me that in the days and weeks leading up to the particular trades being cited (Sosa, Patterson, Barrett, and now Jones), people couldn't wait to be rid of these guys, and they were trashing Hendry for some perceived unwillingness to admit a mistake and move on. How many "just DFA him already Jim" posts have we all read, anyway? It's countless. So a guy's going bad and bringing the team down. (Sh)it happens. So what to do about it? Option A: Sell low. Option B: Continue running the guy out there and costing the team wins, hoping against hope that things will someday turn around. Option C: Continue paying the guy to rot at the end of the bench, and play with a 24-man roster. Hmm, suddenly selling low seems pretty smart to me.