CubColtPacer

Another update:

Not at all. I don't think he'd be worth the talent that would be required to get him. There is so little consistency in his numbers and splits that he is too much of a question mark to be giving top talent for.

The deal is Murton, Gallagher, E-Patt. At least that's the reported deal. Bedard isn't coming to the Cubs. They simply don't have enough. The insiders are reporting that the Reds have upped their offer on Bedard, although they don't know what the exact offer is.

And from the extreme level of respect given to these guys, that couldn't have been the first trade they've broken. The insider did say that he didn't know exact timing but he assumed it would be this afternoon that the trade would be announced. He also said he hasn't received the official call yet. So it's not 100% yet, but it does seem as close as it can get.

I would at least hope that if they were going to move Soriano down to 5 that they would put Roberts at 1 and Theriot at 2, although I certainly hope that Theriot is nowhere near the top. I was just thinking that Pie's production might be slightly down if he's batting directly behind Soto. Pie legs out a lot of his doubles and triples, and he's not going to be able to do that as much if the slowest man on the team is on 1st base. Putting Pie in front of Soto makes even less sense though because that gives more opportunities to a likely worse hitter.

Trading for Bedard strengthens this team more than trading for Roberts. Of course it does, but trading for Bedard requires a lot more in prospects.

The Cubs need to acquire another SS if they need average production out of the SS position. Unfortunately, it seems like every SS will require too much value to trade for. So the Cubs options, if it be Theriot, Cedeno, DeRosa, or some combination thereof is still the best option as of this point, although far from ideal. If the Cubs get an opening for an available better SS, they should take it.

This observation doesn't hold. When you have a lot of range, you're going to have a lot more off-balanced throws, and correspondingly more errors. So you should expect more throwing errors from a wide-ranging SS. The observation should be: a percentage of the balls he will get to will result in errors, but the alternative without the range was a base hit, so you live with the extra couple of errors to get the base-hits-turned-into-outs from the extra range and accurate throws. It's not just throwing errors that result from the extra range though. You're right, you would expect that increased range would cause more throwing errors. Cedeno's bad throws are not limited to that though. He has trouble throwing all types of plays at times. Plus, it has to be considered that almost every throwing error results in extra bases, while a lack of range by a SS typically will result in a single. I'm just saying that it's not as clearcut as Cedeno has a better range and better arm so that means he's a better SS. Cedeno's SS defense in 2006 was no better than Theriot's SS defense in 2007, and it is still to be seen if Cedeno has improved with the mistakes or not.

I don't think we can still assume that Cedeno is automatically a better defender. He still seems to have a big problem with throwing errors which will negate most of the good that his superior range will give you. The latest update on the trade from one of the insiders was that he believes it should be done later today, and that the delay is MacPhail trying to get a little more from the deal before he finishes it.

To make room for who at 2nd, Fontenot ? DeRosa tried ground balls at SS when Izturis and Cedeno were struggling and the consensus still was that Theriot couldn't play SS and yet couldn't stick at SS. DeRosa and Theriot tried ground balls at the same time. One of them was going to play 2nd, and the other one was going to play SS. Theriot won. Although Lou did try Fontenot there over DeRosa when Theriot fell out of favor. When Fontenot failed, he went back to Theriot. That's probably the biggest indication of what Lou thinks of DeRosa's ability there.

give that kid a chance too...i am secretly praying he wins the job during ST...anybody but theriot... is fontenot still on the team because if he is he shouldn't be If Roberts is traded for there almost certainly won't be room for Fontenot anymore.

I don't understand why. His perceived trade value is probably still lower than his production (the utility player label). If DeRosa then were traded, and I can't see him realistically being moved in a deal for a SS, then who backs up 3rd base? Who is the 4th OF? Plus, I can't see him being enough to trade him straight up for anything. We could dig further into our system to trade DeRosa+prospects for a starting pitcher, but I don't see how that helps the Cubs more than DeRosa does.

I'd give him a low-base pay, incentive-laden contract without question. me too anything besides dempster...fukudome had me so excited until i remembered that dempster was still slotted to start in 08... then my hopes were dashed! #-o Dempster's not slotted to start, he's just one of the candidates for the 5th starter spot. I have to think that right now Kevin Hart has a chance to steal that spot away. Lou likes him a lot, and with a good spring I could easily see that happening. Marshall is also still in the mix, although IMO he'll have to show something to get the spot back, fair or not. Besides, with the Cubs top 3 in the rotation and their good bullpen, they'll likely be at least a slightly above average pitching staff even if the 4 and 5 spots implode, and quite a bit better than that if at least one of them turns out to be average (like both of them did last year).

And one last update from the second insider, when asked if he was hearing the same things as the first guy:

LMAO! Back to square one! It meant that they couldn't pull off a deal for both of them together. The Roberts deal is still alive and supposedly getting close, far from square one.

I'm happy to see Blanco recover from his 5/40 start. In his last 74 at-bats, he's batted at a .284/.354/.486 clip. It at least shows that he might be recovered somewhat from his injury, and might resume putting up his regular backup catcher numbers instead of a horrifically bad line next year.

DeRosa probably becomes the primary backup in left and right with this move. Fuld would be the backup CF.

Agreed. Also add in a few facts: DeRosa has had questions about wearing down when playing everyday both in 2006 and 2007. I remember a lot of people saying that he needed days off in the late July/August stretch when there were some injuries, but the Cubs simply couldn't give them because they needed him on the field too badly. Orioles fans say that Roberts is the same way, that he would have given better production if he could have rested a little more, but the Orioles needed his bat too badly. Now, the Cubs can do both. Roberts has a significant left/right split. If DeRosa plays 2nd against even half the left-handers, Roberts' production goes up. Having another good middle infielder in the mix at least allows them to consider playing DeRosa at SS at least occasionally, which would help. DeRosa had less than half the at-bats at 2nd base last year. In effect, Roberts will likely be replacing somebody else just as much as he is replacing DeRosa. There are other smaller benefits that I won't list because I don't want to make this an essay. Suffice it to say to just compare DeRosa to Roberts and conclude it's a marginal upgrade is not looking at how Lou has and will use DeRosa. When you add in the fact of how Lou will use Murton and Patterson (not very much), and the fact that Gallagher might not have a clear cut spot on this years team, it makes perfect sense to make this upgrade.

Cabrera would probably be no bigger than an upgrade than Roberts would be. If it were just Cabrera vs Theriot and Roberts vs DeRosa, Cabrera would be a little bigger of an upgrade, but adding in the factor of DeRosa taking away 200 AB's or more from Fontenot and Roberts becomes the better upgrade.

I think, but am not positive, that his K rate and BB rate took a step backward in 2007. I know he took walks less frequently. Pie's walk rate in 2006 (AAA): 1 BB per 12.15 AB's Pie's walk rate in 2007 (AAA): 1 BB per 12.05 AB's Pie's walk rate in 2007 (MLB): 1 BB per 12.64 AB's Pie's K rate in 2006 (AAA): 1 K per 4.43 AB's Pie's K rate in 2007 (AAA): 1 K per 5.72 AB's Pie's K rate in 2007 (MLB): 1 K per 4.12 AB's So walk rate basically stayed the same in AAA with a very slight improvement and K rate improved quite a bit. His MLB numbers are down for both, but that's to be expected.

If you're worried about a strikeout not moving runners, Soriano is best served in the leadoff spot. A leadoff hitter is going to come up more often with the bases empty than a middle of the order hitter, so Soriano's strikeouts are actually least damaging in the #1 spot, not most damaging.

For some reason, people continue to overrate most hitters while underrating pitchers. There are plenty of hitters that are labeled stars or highly productive players that are slightly above average or even worse, but the criteria to be a #1, #2, or #3 starter is absolutely ridiculous when you compare it to the actual production of pitchers. For example, the Cubs rotation last year. Rogers claims there was no good #2. In reality, Lilly, Hill, and Z were all good number 2 starters last year. Marshall was a #2 by production knocked down a little bit because of durability, and most people would have labeled him as a #4 or 5. Marquis was a #3, but his perception would put him at #5 or worse. There's a reason why everybody complains about their rotation (except for a truly dominant pitching team) and that's because the expectations for pitchers are way too high. The Cubs were 2nd in the NL in E.R.A. by starters and 2nd in WHIP, but there were still lots of complaints about the rotation by media and fans alike about the rotation. My guess is if the Cubs had been 2nd in runs scored and OPS, a lot fewer fans would be complaining about the offense than complained about the rotation.

2 things 1. Someone being horrible at being a G.M. does not mean that he would be a bad scout. 2. Even if he is an awful scout, one bad scout will have little impact on the organization.

That's the part of this thread that I don't understand. Prior is free to go wherever he wants. If Houston is the best situation for him, then Houston is the best situation. I doubt it will be, and I doubt he'll go anywhere in the division. If he does though, it will just be be a business decision, just like the Cubs made a business decision in letting him go.

He had even worse numbers last year in winter league before they "messed with his swing". .216/.263/.296 to be exact. I don't think you can nail down messing with his swing as the one cause of his struggles.