davearm

By future, I'm looking farther ahead than next season. Barring any unexpected setbacks, Patterson has the job in 2008. Walker won't bring us much of anything in a trade, so why not keep him? Ideally, Walker would be back for 1 more season next year, but there are also other options like Belliard out there that can be had on a 1 year deal. My point is, if you're going to trade Dempster, the last thing this franchise needs is someone to play 2B. We already have 4. What goony said. Counting on Patterson to be the 2B of the future is a foolish thing to do at this stage. If it works out that way, great, but don't plan around it. Giles solidifies the position for a minimum of this year and next, and possibly much longer than that if he wants to stay and they want to extend him. People talk a lot about how, until Ramirez arrived, 3B had been a wasteland since the Santo days. Well don't look now, but the same is true of 2B since the Sandberg days.

That's confusing to me. You want to stop the revolving door by bringing in someone for basically 1 year? Why would you want to trade Dempster to fill a position that is already adequately filled and in no real danger of being vacant in the future? Having the same everyday 2B for the next 1 1/2 years (and perhaps longer) would be a welcome change from what we've seen for the last several years, where the starts are shared amongst several guys each with their own deficiencies. Especially considering that Giles represents the best combination of positives from the whole lot of them -- he's got as much speed, defense, pop, OBP, etc. as anyone we've run out there. And how is it that you figure that 2B is "in no real danger of being vacant in the future"? Who's playing there next year?

Dempster for Marcus Giles would look nice to me. Put an end to this 3+ year revolving door at 2B and create a nice bridge to 2008, when EPat might be ready to step in. Giles also gives the Cubs a leadoff option when Pierre is gone. Seems like the proverbial buy low opportunity, if ATL is serious about giving his job to Betemit.

Atlanta is an obvious one. They've had a different guy lead them in saves just about every year of their 14-year run atop the division. Other teams have won the WS with rookie closers (Jenks, FRod).

Try this on for size: Manager: Greg Maddux Pitching Coach: Mike Maddux (or perhaps visa versa)

Sa-MAR-zhuh I thought it was Sa-MAR-ja

If I'm reading this whole thing correctly, Hunter had a 5-team NTC in his contract, and he at some point nominated Chicago, Boston, Detroit, TB, and Toronto as the 5 he didn't want. Now we come to find out that Chicago and Boston are no longer on Torii's "banned" list. Doesn't that put CHC and BOS at 25th and 26th on his full priority list, with the 24 teams he didn't originally specify still ahead of them? It hardly sounds to me like the guy is all gung ho to come here.

I'm wondering the same thing. That's kinda nuts. But then so is the NCAA. This is not all that uncommon. For example, Ricky Williams played minor league ball during the summer while at Texas. Playing pro baseball doesn't impact a guy's NCAA eligibility for any sport other than baseball. But does it make sense that they would be restricted from making money is so many other ways, but not this way? The NCAA doesn't want guys (and gals) to get preferential treatment or special benefits by virtue of the fact that they play a particular sport. Apparently the NCAA does not believe the Cubs drafting Samardzija and offering him $8M has anything to do with him being a ND football player. Now the student/athlete that gets offered a job at McDonald's? Impossible to say if he got that opportunity because the manager is a huge supporter of the local State U. So they don't allow it. (Well, if it's true that the NCAA won't permit a kid to work at McDonald's, that'd be the reasoning anyway.)

I'm wondering the same thing. That's kinda nuts. But then so is the NCAA. This is not all that uncommon. For example, Ricky Williams played minor league ball during the summer while at Texas. Playing pro baseball doesn't impact a guy's NCAA eligibility for any sport other than baseball.

Guys the deal's probably heavily backloaded. The $500K signing bonus is his to keep regardless. The rest, he has to show up with a glove and spikes to get. Imagine something like: Bonus: $500K Year 1: $300K Year 2: $700K Year 3: $1M Year 4: $2M Year 5: $3.5M If he plays well this fall and goes in the first round next April, some NFL team will beat this deal, he'll be gone, and the Cubs will be out the $500K and the 5th round pick.

There is no such thing. yeah there is. OK, example? There may not be "meaningless" home runs. But a late-inning hr that takes your team from a deficit to a lead (which Ken Griffey Jr. has already done, like, 3 times this year) is, to me, far more valuable than a solo homer in a game where one team or the other leads by 5+ runs. It's not meaningless, but it's not all that helpful. Like the way he turned a 9-2 game to a 9-3 game on Sunday. Almost all his homers are like that, and that's why lots of Reds fans are unimpressed with his OPS and want him gone. Exactly. IMO Dunn is the king of the late-inning solo shot in the midst of a blowout. If you don't like the term meaningless Pedro, then by all means choose another one that better expresses the fact that such a HR only very rarely has any bearing on the final outcome of the game. Or perhaps you take the extreme literal position that all runs have equal value.

I'm less and less impressed with Adam Dunn every time I see him. The guy's content to stand at the plate and take pitches until he gets one that he can launch 400+ ft. He'll actually succeed at doing so around 50 times a year. The other 600 plate appearances, he either gets walked, or makes an out... most frequently, a strikeout.

Great synopsis. The only nitpick: If that request is not granted by the start of spring training, the player may elect to become an unrestricted free agent It's not automatic, and for a case like Javy Vazquez, after seasons of 4.91 and 4.42 ERAs, it would have been tough for him to walk away from the 2/$24M left on his deal if the DBacks had not honored his trade request.

I'd have the Rangers high on the list for both Wood and Walker. Conventional wisdom is that Texas is a place Wood might approve a trade, and the Rangers have had interest in Walker in the past. I'd love to see both guys go there in exchange for Ian Kinsler and one of their pitching prospects (Diamond/Danks/Volquez/Hurley). I don't see the Cubs moving Maddux to a team without his blessing. That eliminates all but SD, ARI, LAD, and ATL. Andre Ethier on LAD has my eye, or of course any of the ARI kids.

This whole discussion is predicated on the assumption that the Yankees are unhappy with ARod, or that he's in Steinbrenner's doghouse, or that they think he's not clutch, or that he's seen as "not a true Yankee", etc. etc. Only then does a trade become a possibility, and at that point, what the Yanks would demand back is anybody's guess. They certainly have some big holes right now that the Cubs could go a long way toward filling with the likes of Ramirez, Jones, Wood, and Williamson. On the other hand, if the Yankees still value ARod as one of the best 3 or 4 hitters in the game, then you can forget all of this.

First, there is quite a bit of difference between 1.67 and 1.34. Second, Howry's WHIP goes off at 1.25/1.17/1.27/1.50 and 1.24. That is a huge difference between the Farn's numbers. Farn's simply walks too many people. And he blew yet another save tonight. His teammates helped him out in the 9th or he may have needed an escort on the way back to Yankeeland. Thanks for proving my point sunny. This year Howry sports a 1.05 WHIP and 0.68 ERA with the bases empty; his WHIP is actually a hair lower with RISP (1.04), but his ERA jumps all the way to 7.04. Has he pitched over 10x worse with RISP than with nobody on? You tell me. Looking strictly at the ERA #s suggests he has.

Why are they necessarily inherited runners? Those runners could have been given up by him. Maybe I'm confused - I was reading the split as appearances where he came in with runners on base and appearances where he came in with bases empty. If the split is based on the status of the bases at each at-bat, then I agree it's totally meaningless. I thought I might be missing something. Guys look at those numbers again. But focus just on the last three: G ERA WHIP BAA Bases Empty: 2.49 1.46 .247 Runners On: 6.49 1.34 .245 RISP: 8.32 1.50 .250 RISP w/2 Outs: 16.13 1.67 .250 Bases Loaded: 8.82 1.47 .317 The WHIP and BAA numbers are staying fairly constant across the different situations. So he's allowing baserunners at roughly the same rate, and hitters are batting for a similar AVG. Meanwhile the ERA nearly triples as runners get on, and then jumps some more as they get to scoring position... even though he's getting the hitter out at about the same rate.

1 year does not a career make. so we are just going to have to disagree. Kyle has up years and then down years. A 4.48 lifetime ERA in 441 games tells me he is not a great pitcher. Kyle is a space cadet and cant handle pressure. He wont make it a week as Yankee closer if Rivera has to go to the DL. The Bronx is a Zoo and will eat him alive. Edit: Here are some split numbers. G GS W L SV CG SHO IP H R ER HR BB K ERA WHIP BAA Bases Empty 419 0 0 0 0 0 0 292.2 290 89 81 43 136 317 2.49 1.46 .247 Runners On 361 0 0 0 0 0 0 280.0 245 223 202 38 130 268 6.49 1.34 .245 RISP 295 0 0 0 0 0 0 164.1 152 170 152 23 95 166 8.32 1.50 .250 RISP w/2 Outs 250 0 0 0 0 0 0 78.2 78 155 141 14 53 88 16.13 1.67 .250 Bases Loaded 58 0 0 0 0 0 0 16.1 20 18 16 2 4 16 8.82 1.47 .317 That is what tells me about pressure. While I understand the point you're trying to make, isn't it inherently more difficult to have high ERA when there is no one on base? I bet if you pulled a lot of pitchers stats, you would see something similar. Perhaps not as extreme as these numbers, but the same trend. I agree with you to a point, but the example you used may not be the best. Exactly. That was one of the absolute worst use of statistics, ever. Oh so you're saying he tends to give up more runs when the bases are loaded versus none on? Hmm. Whoda thunk it. :roll:

I still like the notion of taking a run at Tejada. Baltimore is very much a candidate for a rebuilding process, so they may be shopping him again soon. If Philly's price for Abreu becomes reasonable, he'd be another guy to target.

While we're on this subject... Is there any precedent for a GM being fired mid-season? I can't think of any. Obviously plenty of managers have been canned during the year, but it seems to me that the front office shakeups almost invariably come in the weeks after the season ends. So the folks that want Hendry's head will likely have to wait for October, at a minimum.

The quoted part above is another perfect example of why the entire management team needs to be kicked to the curb. A comment like this is supposed to net a huge return in trade? Ahem, that's Jayson Stark talking (guessing), not anyone within the Cubs' management.

It's not the money. It's the message that the extension sent. It says, we're happy with the job you're doing, and we want you around for several more years. And if they were happy with the job Hendry had done as of a few weeks ago, I doubt a handful of losses in a 162 game season has changed their minds.

Agreed. I can't see the Cubs moving Maddux without him being onboard.

If you're still playing for this year, then Walker for Hillenbrand/Hinske/Cattalanoto makes no sense, because Walker is a better fit since he plays 2B. If you're packing it in for this year, then Walker for Hillenbrand/Hinske/Cattalanoto makes no sense, because none of those guys are pieces for the future.

LOL. That was a sucker punch, plain and simple. Pierzynski had no reason to expect a punch was coming, and no chance to defend himself even if he did. By the time Pierzynski had a chance to begin processing why the heck Barrett was grabbing him, he was already headed to the ground.