Danny82

Since when is a player's last 100 at bats an effective way to judge how much he should be making? Since when are his last 520 AB's an effective way to judge how much he should be making? I think it is quite obvious that one alternative is better than the other. Not saying that 520 is ideal, but it's sure a heck of a lot better than 100.

Since when is a player's last 100 at bats an effective way to judge how much he should be making?

So you're saying he'll be able to keep that up, right? :D I don't think BABIP is as "lucky" of a statistic as some people would have you believe.

People also guaranteed that his numbers would take a nosedive once he played 1/2 of his games in Washington's ballpark instead of Texas'.

FYI, Soriano has a 78% stolen base percentage for his career. That's a good enough percentage where his base stealing helps his teams.

Am I missing something here or isn't Rowand a FA now? Is he really that bad of an option if they can't get Drew to play center? You know, provided they made a big splash or two elsewhere.

Why would the Cubs want to leave themselves with a GAPING hole at catcher?

Must be some "package" that you are throwing in with Izturis to acquire Tejada. You know they are going to need much more major league ready talent in return, don't you? If you had any hopes of actually fielding that lineup, the pitching staff would be decimated via trade. Just not going to happen.

If Theriot were able to come anywhere close to last year's numbers, the decision would be a no brainer. But, those numbers are way better than where his minor league numbers would indicate his actual ability to lie. While I wish he could, I just don't see him as a guy who can have a .400 OBP over the course of a full season.

The very fact that it is taking this long pretty much shreds Olney's story to pieces. Boston may very well have submitted the highest bid, but no way that team would have rejected an offer of 38-45M.

I blame MacPhail for this stupid out in his contract unless hendry has been trying to lowball him. Ramirez is going to go where the money is. A lot of people are awfully critical of MacPhail giving A-Ram that out...without knowing all the relevant information. The funny thing is, none of us know if he even would have been a cub the past couple of years without that clause in his contract, do we?

I think quite a few of you are needlessly freaking out about this...at least for now. There's really no point in getting so upset until he actually signs somewhere else. Nothing's finished yet. Personally, I just find it best to sit back and see what happens. Then, when it does, that's the time to react...and berate those in charge, if necessary.

Man, Olney is an idiot. His first two reasons for "why Matsuzaka makes sense for the Red Sox" would be true for virtually ANY team. Really, Buster, he would help the Red Sox rotation? Gee, I can't think of any other team that comment would apply to...say, maybe EVERY other team in MLB???

God forbid!!!

Eyre and Howry have multiyear deals... and one has a No Trade Clause. as for the other.. no team would want to pick up a player with more than a year left on his deal... unless the selling team was going to pay most of the contract or the contract was a low price. That is absolutely NOT true. I'm sure there are plenty of teams that are quite interested in Eyre or Howry, whether they have two more years on their contract or none. In fact, the fact that those two have more years on their deals left makes them MORE valuable.

Apparently $8m in guaranteed cash. Yeowza! Carson Palmer's signing bonus was $10m as the #1 overall pick in 2003. $8m would be one heck of a carrot. Unfortunately for baseball plans, signing bonuses in the NFL are skyrocketing. The 20th pick, where some have Samardzija projected, got 6.7 million in guaranteed money last year (Marcus Spears). Mel Kiper has Samarzija as 7th on his big board. The Vikings selected a wide receiver in that spot in 2005, and T. Williamson got 13.3 million guaranteed. Both of these numbers should be sharply up with the 2007 draft, where I think the 20th pick will get well over 8 million guaranteed. The Cubs best hope is that the same thing that happened in the MLB draft happens in the NFL draft, and teams shy away from Samardzija because of his wanting to play two sports. Kiper's board only includes seniors. He wouldn't be close to the top 10 when all the juniors come out. And Johnson is almost assured to come out and be a top 5 pick.

Sarcasm, right?

Yeah, but that was Outshined's point. Ginn might jump ahead of Samardzija. NFL scouts will fall in love with Johnson, Jarrett and Rice's athleticness, combine workouts, 40-times and stuff like that and Jeff won't be as impressive in some of those areas. He is a first round NFL pick, though. I was never speaking to Outshine's point. I was simply saying that it is highly unlikely that Jeff would ever be the first receiver taken. Ginn, as a receiver, is nowhere near where Jeff is, IMHO. Ginn is a whale of a return man, but unfortunately people seem to be equating those talents into his abilities as a receiver...which are good, but not great.

I don't see Rice going ahead of Johnson or Jarrett (if he declares). Maybe in front of Smardjia (sp?).

Bias is awesome. [Links and stuff] I wouldn't say he's 'far and away' the best WR, but depending on who comes out early and who doesn't, he could be the top WR taken. I haven't seen him go any lower than 22 in any mock draft so far. Let's not kid ourselves about what kind of football prospect he is. Correct. Far and away is extreme, but he is the top WR in the draft right now. There will likely be some that come out early. He should go 1st round, but I wouldn't be surprised if he's not the 1st WR taken. A lot can happen in 10 months. Calvin Johnson is almost a certainty to go pro after his junior year and would be pretty much assured of being the top receiver in the draft when he does so.

I'm guessing that if the Cubs had a second or third round pic, they don't take him at 13. They must see something they didn't want to pass on. Who knows what though.

Is anyone in this thread saying that it is? Yes. And more than once. I never said this was a terrible move or one that shouldn't be done. To me it is a so what trade at best, and a what were they thinking trade at worst. But he comes cheap and if he helps the bench great, but the Cubs could have used the help about 8 weeks ago. It makes the team better. Isn't that the bottom line? And if so, why complain??? It's obviously not some sort of blockbuster deal, but it gives them a better chance to win from here on out. Sometimes the nitpicking gets old. Sometimes the losing gets old. It could make the team better, but not appreciably better. And it could serve as an excuse not to make a deal that would actually make a difference. Hendry's first excuse was nobody else wanted to deal. When that was proved wrong, he made a move for a guy who can only help in minimal ways. So when people beg him to get the bat, he can say he already did, and his apologists will tell us not to be greedy. You do realize that it is highly unlikely that Hendry could have made the current deal 3-4 weeks ago, right? And also, he never said "no one wanted to deal." Finally, how 'bout we hold off a little bit on criticizing the deal because of the myriad of negative "coulds" that could possibly stem from the trade until those "coulds" actually happen? Otherwise, it just looks like posters trying to find whatever negative inferences they can glean from the situation. Which, honestly, isn't all that uncommon on the board sometimes.

Is anyone in this thread saying that it is? Yes. And more than once. I never said this was a terrible move or one that shouldn't be done. To me it is a so what trade at best, and a what were they thinking trade at worst. But he comes cheap and if he helps the bench great, but the Cubs could have used the help about 8 weeks ago. It makes the team better. Isn't that the bottom line? And if so, why complain??? It's obviously not some sort of blockbuster deal, but it gives them a better chance to win from here on out. Sometimes the nitpicking gets old.

what? :roll: I don't know why you are rolling your eyes. Nevin was one of the best bats the Rangers had during the first few weeks of the season. Better than Tex, that's for sure.

"at all"??? You are overstating your position. It obviously gives the Cubs a better option than they currently have at 1B until Lee gets back and a right handed power bat on the bench when he does. It makes them better right now. You will have a hard time refuting that point.