davearm

Because a everyday player (if you can call Griffey that) that can help on a daily basis, not once every 5 days... Jimmy Rollins has logged the most PAs of any position player in MLB so far this year -- 480. Four Cub starters have pitched to more than 480 batters so far this year. Z: 599 Lilly: 536 Marquis: 506 Hill: 482 The notion that an everyday player has a larger impact on a season than a starting pitcher is dubious, at best.

Indeed. The thread that really needs bumping is the Marquis one. A distinct minority felt there was actually a pretty good chance that the guy would make for a real solid #5 starter. Those thoughts were drowned out by wave after wave of laughter and venom. Lo and behold, Marquis has been... a real solid #5 starter. Marquis 2007 = Jones 2006. (Let's hope Marquis 2008 /= Jones 2007.) ;)

Jim Bowden disagrees.

OK I gotta ask. With all of this Dunn / Griffey / Dye / Murton / we need an upgrade in RF talk, does anyone ever find themselves getting just a little curious about Josh Kroeger and his 20 HRs and 1.000 OPS? The dude's been seriously raking all year. Someone just go ahead and tell me I'm nuts for having that thought even cross my mind and that'll be that.

Or the Dunn for Wise + Gwynn + prospect rumor from a couple days ago. :popcorn:

Even if you (conveniently) exclude 2002 and 2003, you still face a huge uphill battle trying to establish that Dunn has been any better than average in August and Sept/Oct. What you've got left is a smattering of 700 - mid 800 range OPSs, one 1000 OPS, and one 594 OPS. Pretty unspectacular.

The 2004-2007 monthly splits I put up are based on ~2000 ABs. The .799 for August + September is based on 570 ABs. You're not going to get very far (not with me at least) arguing that these sample sizes aren't large enough to draw any meaningful conclusions. At a bare minimum, there's strong reason to suspect that if Dunn were to come here, he wouldn't deliver the phenomenal 900+ OPS numbers everyone is all gaga over. I disagree. His post ASB numbers would worry me if they were at all consistent, but they aren't. They have been all over the map, from great to horrible. You can't possibly argue that that constitutes a definitive pattern in his career. Certainly, the .900+ OPS is not guaranteed, but I can't imagine that the .645 OPS is more likely, considering that it has happened only once in three years. With all due respect, I don't think you're viewing this situation objectively. Here's what Dunn's been able to produce in late-season months since he became a full-time player in 2002. Dunn's August OPSs, by month Year PA OPS 2002 128 0.588 2003 50 0.588 2004 117 1.000 2005 112 0.795 2006 116 0.700 Totl 523 0.754 Dunn's Sept/Oct OPSs, by month Year PA OPS 2002 100 0.584 2004 127 0.828 2005 130 0.847 2006 109 0.594 Totl 466 0.728 I count 9 monthly observations there. 1 phenomenal one: OPS of 1000 2 good ones: OPS of 800-850 1 "meh" one: OPS of 795 1 poor one: OPS of 700 4 horrible ones: OPS below 600. FOUR LATE-SEASON MONTHS BELOW 600! OUT OF NINE TOTAL! Again I'll ask. Why is it widely accepted that Zambrano is a slow starter, yet unaccepted that Dunn is a poor finisher? How much more evidence needs to be presented here?

Incorrect. That is not the bare minimum of conclusions. The bare minimum of conclusions is to believe that these numbers that you outline are meaningless. What you present is the worst case scenario, that he will continue 'trending' downward in the later months of the season, which is problematic for the reasons that TT states. Wrong. An OPS of around 800, or 100 or more points lower than the 900+ that everyone is drooling over, is not the worst case scenario. The worst case scenario is he repeats what he's already done once... something in the 650 range.

The 2004-2007 monthly splits I put up are based on ~2000 ABs. The .799 for August + September is based on 570 ABs. You're not going to get very far (not with me at least) arguing that these sample sizes aren't large enough to draw any meaningful conclusions. At a bare minimum, there's strong reason to suspect that if Dunn were to come here, he wouldn't deliver the phenomenal 900+ OPS numbers everyone is all gaga over.

But that's not true. August - End of Season 2004: .254/.348/.563/.911 2005: .237/.370/.438/.808 2006: .176/.299/.346/.645 I didn't say *each* of the last three seasons, I said *over* the last three seasons. Weight those three OPS numbers by plate appearances, and you get 797. Ergo the conclusion, over the last three seasons, Dunn's OPS for the months of August and September is below 800. Put it this way -- if we knew for sure that the Cubs would get one of those three numbers from Dunn (911, 808, 645), then the enthusiasm level around here would decline dramatically. You averaged them? I'd say that's not very intellectually honest. Your original point was implying that Dunn was not as good a hitter down the stretch. Given that time-driven splits aren't reliable to begin with, there'd need to be a consistent drop in performance for it to have any merit. That obviously hasn't been the case. To use an average is to put extra emphasis on the outlier of last year. As far as "trend lines" go, given what I just said about the reliability of timed splits, there would have to be some sort of cause for him to somehow be declining in his ability to hit after the deadline. Unless there's something you can point to that would cause him to heavily wear down after July, we have to assume that last year is an outlier. Not very intellectually honest? It was a quick way to boil down Dunn's late-season production over the last three years to a single OPS number. I surely could go to the trouble of tallying up the guy's hits, walks, HBP, TBs, etc etc and get the true OPS number, but it wouldn't be very different from the 797 figure. In fact it might be exactly the same. Nobody seems to dispute the notion that Carlos Zambrano is a notoriously slow starter, and a cursory look at his April stats over recent years confirms this. I don't hear anyone questioning the validity of those time-based splits. It's mostly just become an accepted truth. Zambrano ERA by month, 2004-2007: April 4.86 May 2.59 June 3.12 July 2.91 August 2.94 September 3.03 So why is there a problem with the notion that Dunn is a notoriously slow finisher, when a cursory look at his August and September stats over recent years confirms this? Dunn OPS by month, 2004-2007: April 1.070 May 0.852 June 0.949 July 0.981 August 0.836 September 0.760 August + September aggregate = 0.799 Wha? If I wanted to put extra emphasis on the outlier of last year, I would simply say, "Dunn had a 645 OPS last year," and leave it at that. Averaging that 06 figure with other years actually helps to hide how horrible he was last year. That would be de-emphasizing 06.

Sean you said something about Dunn's bat would be worth it even if he played in the OF with his back to the plate (paraphrasing). Still feel that way, after seeing how Dunn has hit down the stretch the last few years?

But that's not true. August - End of Season 2004: .254/.348/.563/.911 2005: .237/.370/.438/.808 2006: .176/.299/.346/.645 I didn't say *each* of the last three seasons, I said *over* the last three seasons. Weight those three OPS numbers by plate appearances, and you get 797. Ergo the conclusion, over the last three seasons, Dunn's OPS for the months of August and September is below 800. Put it this way -- if we knew for sure that the Cubs would get one of those three numbers from Dunn (911, 808, 645), then the enthusiasm level around here would decline dramatically.

I think it'd be worth a little suspect defense for a guy who will post a 900+ OPS. Except over the last three seasons, Dunn's OPS for the months of August and September is below 800. This guy's been a very poor finisher two years in a row, folks.

If I'm Daniels I hang up the phone right then. I've got teams willing to trade me the prospects I want without taking on their crap. If that's true, then why isn't Tex gone already? Regardless, the deal has to make sense for Texas AND for the Cubs. Taking on an additional $10M in payroll is not going to make sense for the Cubs. Now maybe that automatically takes the Cubs out of the running. Who knows.

Any deal for Tex has to start with Jones, to balance some salary. Then add a group of young cheap guys to that. With Jones gone, that kinda takes Pie off the table (we'll need a CF). Texas needs pitching and OF, so sort through names like Hill, Marshall, Gallagher, and Veal; Murton and Kroeger. Maybe you can pay part of the tab with a superutility guy like Theriot. Personally I think you're most of the way there with Hill or Marshall. I'd prefer to send Veal or Gallagher though. So maybe: Jones Murton Veal/Gallagher Or... Jones Kroeger Theriot Veal/Gallagher Toss in a Moore or a Fox if that's what it takes to push a deal through. Personally I'd rather spend less and go get an actuall RF -- Nady.

He's not that loved, but he is loved. Well who would you put ahead of Wood on that list? Sosa used to be. Not anymore.

that describes just about every pitcher in the game except for the top tier elite. even chris young wasn't amazing for his first 5 starts. though he hasn't had a bad start in weeks. so is zambrano, let's trade him too Agreed. Get a boatload of young guys back, and replace Z in the rotation with Gallagher.

I have nothing against Chris Carpenter, because he seems like a nice guy. And I really don't wish ill will on our rivals. But it'd sure be something if this turns out to be career-ending, and that 6 IP back in April is all the Cards get for their $63M. Guys like Dreifort and Hampton would be off the hook, and there'd be a new leader in the "worst performance-per-dollar" clubhouse.

All this Murton and Cedeno kvetching is out of control. A RH 1B goes on suspension, so they call up... a RH 1B. A LH 1B/OF gets hurt, so they call up... a LH 1B/OF. Not real tough to follow the thought process here folks. If Soriano (Theriot) goes down and Murton (Cedeno) doesn't get the call, THEN go ahead and pull your hair out.

Good. If it aint broke don't fix it.

Pure gold. Thanks a ton for enlightening us.

Why is this still going on? Everybody can decide for themselves who is and who is not a legitimate "insider", and what alleged "inside information" is and is not credible. So believe what you choose to believe, and ignore the rest (and let everyone else here do the same). It should be no skin off of anyone else's back either way.

True; I'd mentioned in an earlier post in this thread that I thought they might transfer Blanco to the 60-day DL to make room on the 40-man. Of course, if an Izturis trade is completed before game time, that might make room on the 40-man (depending on what the Cubs get back in return).If there's any fire behind this Izturis smoke, then they may just DFA him even if a trade has not been completed (as with Bowen).

I'm still intrigued by the notion that Fox is up so that other teams can have a look at him prior to the trade deadline...

Except simply sending Gallagher down doesn't open a spot for Fox on the 40-man. They're going to need to create openings on both the 40- and the 25-man rosters.