badnews

The Cubs were 16th in the majors in runs scored. The Brewers being 14th in walks is still not the same as the Cubs being 26th in walks and so forth. I wasn't talking about not being in the top 10 in walks. What I said was, how many Murderer's Row lineups like people keep mentioning don't have anyone who walks 90+ times, and how many of them are in the bottom 10 in walks?

Does the hype usually match the results though? Matsuzaka was supposed to be the best pitcher on the planet, with 8 pitches he could throw for strikes whenever he wanted, etc. I'd say the relief pitchers have thrived, but otherwise it's a little more unclear. One thing I've noticed about people talking about Japanese players - there is no tempered enthusiasm. Most everyone tends to be fantastic and people act like you'll get billions of dollars in new revenue or something. I'm not sure I'm reading correctly that the Matsuis haven't succeeded. Hideki Matsui is fine. Iguchi doesn't impress me too much. Johjima's 2007 offense was good enough but not great, although his defense is pretty nice. Iwamura doesn't make much money, which is good considering his 3b numbers. Also, I don't think you can make blanket statements about the tendencies of Asian or Latin American players.

Uh, apparently my definition of "standout" is a little different from theirs.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but looking at the parks where Jackson put up his best numbers it looks like it's not totally equal. To the other guy, actually Murton is 7 months older than Jackson and was only drafted 13 spots below him.

Let's say with the bases empty Soriano hits like Vlad Guerrero and with runners on or RISP he hits like Mark DeRosa. Is this who you want to give the majority of your RBI opportunities to? If so, why not just give them to Mark DeRosa already. Who would you rather pay $18 million a year for, Vlad Guerrero or Mark DeRosa? Frankly I have little faith in Soriano really. As long as we're stuck with him we should just leave well enough alone and stop complaining about the solo home runs. I remember when Bill Mueller was with the Red Sox he had this crazy schtick where he'd only want to bat 8th, and everyone wanted him to bat up in the lineup, and they tried him at leadoff and he just crapped out.

I ask because on a number of larger message boards and blogs that are not team-specific, my finding has been that fans think Conor Jackson has "excellent" trade value and Matt Murton has "none or close to none." Now, I'm not saying Murton is as good a hitter as Jackson, he isn't. But they seem somewhat closer than people think. The only question I want people to answer is this: Why is Jackson a darling for most people, with "excellent" trade value while Murton is just dumped on? I don't think anyone would say Murton isn't half the ballplayer Jackson is, so why does Murton have less than half the trade value? [i put this under Transactions because it's kind of an offshoot of my Wuertz trade value/perceived trade value topic, feel free to move it if you feel it doesn't fit.]

I like Clevenger just because I enjoy following how little he strikes out. However Mark Reed has pinch-run for him before, which sounds like he's hideously immobile.

I think that's just a blandishment that isn't proven or anything. I could say Marmol's got the better pitcher's physique and we're not really getting anywhere.

I can't believe we're quoting ERA+ and such about 11 innings. An 11 inning sample size for a guy first coming up doesn't mean anything. The number of bad relievers who've had better 11 inning runs than that is staggering. A general question - why is his repetoire starter-worthy?

Wuertz was good in August and September last year and good in September this year. Your statement is glib but I don't think it's true. Getting back to the topic at hand, does anybody think that when the Cubs are shopping for someone, the price is like double what we'd have to pay to get that person? I mean, the relievers who are better and more consistent than Wuertz with his amount of service time are the real bullpen gems. If Wuertz isn't worth anything, let's acquire another "worthless" guy like him. Wuertz gets "figured out" but he's still 4th in the majors in stranding inherited runners. I am dissatisfied with the idea that everyone we could trade gets pennies on the dollar for if we wanted to trade for a comparable player. For example people probably think Noah Lowry and his ridiculous WHIP and laughable K/BB ratio has more trade value than Rich Hill. Heck, people probably think Chuck James has more trade value than Hill. I disagree with both statements. Anyway, if any talent the Cubs are trading is automatically worth less than another team trading a similar talent it probably says all you need to know about Hendry's bartering skills.

Tejada isn't ARod, but it's not like he doesn't walk. The way the Cubs can fix their offense is by getting significant improvements at their worst positions, and SS was their worst position, along with C, last year. Tejada and Soto could easily eclipse the production from their respective positions, and, barring major setbacks elsewhere, that would significantly improve the offense. You'd probably be able to talk about a top 5 lineup at that point. If you are getting top 5 pitching and top 5 hitting, you are going to have some nice success. I don't agree. People said we would have a Top 5 lineup last year too. We're not going to have a Top 5 lineup by continually adding the same type of players, I think. What do you mean Tejada walks? 40 walks in 654 ABs, 46 walks in 648 ABs, 41 walks in 514 ABs, I think that qualifies as another righty masher who doesn't walk enough. I don't know why I should assume he'll rebound just because it's nice to think in a scenario where the Cubs get him. I'm not saying your argument doesn't have some merit, but I don't agree with it. I see it like the 2004 Cubs. They were virtually tied for 4th in the NL in OPS but they were 16th in runs. They had the same OPS as the Phillies that year but scored way fewer runs than them. I think this "Top 5 lineup" bit people trod out year after year is just a red herring. The 2004 Cubs were not a top team in runs, and every regular in the lineup had an OPS over .800 except Patterson, who had a .780 OPS I believe. You had five guys with an OPS over .830 and they were 1st in the NL in home runs by an enormous margin. I don't like this game where we hype guys up just because they're available. Tejada doesn't even get us back to the 2004 level, much less a Top 5 lineup. How many Top 5 lineups have no one who walks 90+ times, or how many Top 5 lineups are in the bottom 10 of walks?

Before you undersell Mr. Wuertz, I would say this - if we were talking about acquiring a guy like Wuertz people would say we would have to give up a ton. He's shown he can pitch anywhere as Wrigley was one of the biggest run-inflating parks this year according to ESPN park factors, he's pretty tough on righties, he averages more than a strikeout per inning, and unless I'm reading the service time wrong he's 3 years away from free agency still. Of course I'm giving Wuertz the hard sell but I've always been more of a fan of his than your average fan. I wonder what a team like the Mets, coming off a horrible collapse and under the duress to do something more than any other team perhaps, would give up for Wuertz, considering their bullpen seemed to be a weakness. I'd like to see the Cubs cook up something for Gomez, out of Martinez, Gomez, and Milledge, Gomez is my favorite. Not going to happen, yeah. But anyway everyone needs bullpen help and has it ever been pricier? How much will Scott Linebrink command in addition to giving up a first round draft pick? 3 years, $21 million? If a team values their 1st round pick more than the talent they have, perhaps we could score one of the "second tier" from the top prospects. Wishful thinking, but bullpen arms seem to be valued higher than ever. Wuertz is still a ways away from free agent, he's posted an ERA+ of 174 and 134 the past two years, more than a strikeout per inning, and oh yes, did I mention that Wuertz was 2nd in the NL and 4th in the majors in stranding inherited baserunners? I have a feeling people will come into the topic and dump on the idea Wuertz has good trade value, but I think giving all the positives, he does. I'd like to hear what others think.

I didn't really think too much about Hart before I saw a number of posts saying they'd rather see Sean Gallagher traded instead of Kevin Hart. Hart's career minor league numbers are somewhat unimpressive. His numbers this year were better but they still don't dazzle. Everything Baseball America has written about him I've seen has been nothing but bland mediocrity. He had 11 good innings this year, prompting an early frenzy that is reminiscent of people gushing over Rocky Cherry's spring training. So why is Hart untouchable? Why should I be confident in him as rotation insurance, and so forth?

If Lincecum could start I don't see why Marmol couldn't. Ceda dominated a very pitcher friendly league but still gave up a ton of walks. He needs a lot more time.

Trading Sean Gallagher will be a mistake. Tejada is not going to fix the Cubs. Continually adding these righthanded mashers who don't walk isn't going to fix the offense. You could add Torii Hunter and Tejada and the offense wouldn't be fixed. At the end of the year we'll just be saying okay, who among the 2008 free agents can fix the offense?

I don't know. I think people may be bending over backwards a little to try and interpret things in a way more favorable to Wilken than they really are. Craig, I'm afraid I don't agree. I can see you're not going wild with your projections and optimism but at the same time it looks to me like what you've done is make a list of warm bodies. We're not anywhere close to the farm system strength we had in the early 2000s, I think we can all agree. But most of the names you're listing are no better than some of the guys people said pretty much the same things about 2004-2006: Mike Phelps Darin Downs Matt Weber John Koronka Todd Blackford Jon Connolly Sean Gallagher Mitch Atkins Angel Guzman Matt Avery Jerry Blevins Grant Johnson Jon Leicester Billy Petrick Chadd Blasko Chris Shaver Scott Taylor Randy Wells Frank Beltran So forth. I'm not trying to say one way or another, but I don't think we're in a different place than we've been pretty much, I don't see the sense of change that it seems people are trying to sell. I think every year people get overexcited about Boise prospects, I remember a lot of excitement about Dylan Johnston, Russell Canzler, Yusuf Carter, Alfred Joseph. I remember the 2004 Boise team, which was the "Promising" All-Star team: Tony Richie, Ryan Norwood, Montanez, Matt Weber, Chris Shaver, J.R. Mathes, and the hard-throwing young relief trio of Jerry Blevins, Jon Hunton, and Will Fenton, throw in Ed Campusano to boot. Long story short is I don't think things are a heck of a lot different. This organization has pretty much always been stuffed to the gills with middling prospects and "guys who could be interesting." Believe me, I've watched them for awhile. A bigger Darin Downs backer probably didn't exist. I'd rather the Cubs were in a position like the Braves, where they could lose 5 of their best 10 prospects and still be in a pretty stable farm system position. We need prospect surplus so we can trade some of these guys off and not have to worry about filling their shoes.

I'm not so optimistic on the trade market. Any team in the outright buyer's position will be at a disadvantage I'm guessing because everybody is looking at the free agent market and grimacing. People are talking about 4 years, $44 million for Carlos Silva, that's enough to have anyone working the phones. Perhaps it's time the Cubs sell high on someone instead of low. Some team is going to make a bad trade this offseason, I hope the Cubs can rob somebody.

Well, I guess I was wrong about the axe to grind eh? I think it's strange but it's neither the jab nor Ryan Franklin vs. Joel Pineiro is worth a protracted back-and-forth. Seriously, just comment on what's in the current topic and don't be so quick to get nasty or condescending and I'll grant you the same courtesy, okay?

I think bringing up an argument from a topic from another board that's long dead and done I'd long forgotten that has little relevance to the current topic qualifies as having an axe to grind. Maybe it's just me, when I have a disagreement with someone on a topic months ago I usually don't even remember who I had it with or see any reason to dredge it up again. He took some humorous comments I made too literally and militantly disagreed, fine, who cares, I'm done arguing about it and hadn't thought of it since the last day I posted there. I didn't say it was outrageous to prefer Franklin, I just said I didn't think it was typical of Jocketty to commit to a guy who you'd think was a flash-in-the-pan. If others have higher hopes for Franklin, fine, but I don't think much of him.

You really have an axe to grind, way to hold on to long-dead, should-be-forgotten arguments with a death's grip. I don't think Ryan Franklin will be alright, in any case. If the money is equal I'd rather have Pineiro.

The point was, someone said Jocketty knew when to cut bait with the improbable success guys, and I don't think he made the right choice with Franklin. Wasted money is wasted money - Glendon Rusch and Neifi Perez at $2.5 million were no bargains.

Does it seem odd to anyone that Gallagher didn't make this list, but if he'd qualified for the PCL one he would've ranked so highly, and the writer projected him as "a #3 or better?"

The last guy I remember getting the "advanced pitcher, quality stuff" billing was Mike Phelps from around the same round. Whatever happened to him?

Didn't Walt Jocketty re-sign Ryan Franklin? Come on, I'd rather have Joel Pineiro than Ryan Franklin. I don't understand some of these contracts. "We've got to keep Pineiro away from the free agent market!" Come on.

Most of his indicator numbers are mediocre, and again, he seems to hit a wall after a certain number of innings. He's not ideally suited to being a reliever. I don't think any AL team is going to bite. How many NL teams don't have better options? We didn't give up much for Jones, DeRosa, Lee, or Ramirez. We're actually going to give up something for Renteria. Renteria's BABIP this year was .375. We had a cold spring in Chicago this year. Danger, danger Will Robinson. This is a zero sum game. Is Renteria a "massive improvement" if he posts something like a .735 OPS like he typically does, minus Theriot's stolen bases, costs a lot more money, and the talent we trade for him goes on to be really good?