CubColtPacer

Probably since the pitcher spot is due up 1st next inning and the Cardinals are at the bottom of the lineup (and did they say Cashner was unavailable tonight?) Risking Schlitter for another inning is probably necessary here instead of using another pitcher for just 1 inning.

Wasn't the correct part of the lineup. They aren't going to take Ramirez, Lee, or Castro out. Colvin was a possibility but that burns a player to only move the pitcher 1 spot. Yea I know it wasnt ideal, but I would have taken Colvin out. That would have given 5 people before Marmols spot, and if you get 5 guys up to bat, you have to figure you would have scored or be very close to scoring. But then instead of Fukudome-Colvin in the 10th you would have Fukudome and either Nady or Baker. So you lose your best lineup and burn one of your last 3 legitimate hitters on the bench to guard against what is only a decent possibility at best. And of course now we see the other reason why Lou didn't do it because apparently he wanted to make sure Marmol was available tomorrow. That is a decision I do not agree with.

Wasn't the correct part of the lineup. They aren't going to take Ramirez, Lee, or Castro out. Colvin was a possibility but that burns a player to only move the pitcher 1 spot.

Barney at 2B is unfortunately not a good alternative option. He has the same flaws as Theriot does because he doesn't walk enough and doesn't hit for much power. He also isn't that good at avoiding strikeouts for the slap hitter that he is. He is a better defender than Theriot but that won't translate as much at 2B as it would at SS. When his batting average probably drops due to better defenses in the majors, he will have trouble. Barney will likely have a role on this team as the backup middle infielder. Hopefully that comes as early as next week when Theriot is potentially traded. But the only position he really has a chance to start at in the majors is SS not 2nd.

Between the sun playing tricks and the wind causing more balls to be near the wall (the two things Soriano struggles at) I think it's a good switch today.

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player. Sosa, Farnsworth, CPatt, Hill, Wuertz, and Pie all had more value (either real or perceived) than what he got back. At least he got value for Hawkins, but it's Sabean, so he can't get too much credit for that. PR moves yes, but Jim proved he could handle those situations with the Hundley deal. What happened with the above? Perceived value is incredibly hard to quantify and that's especially true with damaged players. Sosa for example seemed to not have any more perceived value because the Cubs spent half the offseason looking for a deal for him. Hill ended up being traded for just cash so its hard to argue that his perceived value was higher than that (if anybody had offered anything the Cubs would have taken it). CPatt and Farnsworth were both terribly inconsistent and in Farnsworth's case the Cubs actually did get a decent return back. The Wuertz trade was definitely the worst one of those listed. His only knocks on his perceived value were his frequent arm troubles and the somewhat lucky 2008. And he's certainly provided lots of actual value that the Cubs could have use. So you think the Braves would've traded Miner for Novoa? Farnsworth was having a ridiculously good season (helped out by a lot of luck in the HR department) at that point. His value had changed. And the Cubs did get Moore who had been the #7 prospect the year before for the Tigers. The Cubs did get a little unlucky there to miss his other career year but he was exactly what he was after the Cubs as he was with the Cubs...a relief pitcher starting to get expensive who was too inconsistent to be worth the expense.

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player. Sosa, Farnsworth, CPatt, Hill, Wuertz, and Pie all had more value (either real or perceived) than what he got back. At least he got value for Hawkins, but it's Sabean, so he can't get too much credit for that. PR moves yes, but Jim proved he could handle those situations with the Hundley deal. What happened with the above? Perceived value is incredibly hard to quantify and that's especially true with damaged players. Sosa for example seemed to not have any more perceived value because the Cubs spent half the offseason looking for a deal for him. Hill ended up being traded for just cash so its hard to argue that his perceived value was higher than that (if anybody had offered anything the Cubs would have taken it). CPatt and Farnsworth were both terribly inconsistent and in Farnsworth's case the Cubs actually did get a decent return back. The Wuertz trade was definitely the worst one of those listed. His only knocks on his perceived value were his frequent arm troubles and the somewhat lucky 2008. And he's certainly provided lots of actual value that the Cubs could have use.

It would be pretty hard to give up less than Hendry has in trades. The list of players who have not fallen apart after leaving the Cubs is pretty small. Hendry's bad trades have usually involved acquiring the wrong player rather than giving up the wrong player.

He is out of options.

Lee hit a medium depth fly ball to center. Bourn caught it flatfooted and Castro who had been a couple steps off retreated to the bag right before the catch and took off. Bourn made a quick one bounce throw but it didn't have enough on it and Castro took third. Now Ramirez was intentionally walked, took second because the Astros infielders were playing in, and then Byrd just now took a walk to load the bases.

So do I. In fact I remember the thing that was repeated was that the Cubs were interested in him as a player but didn't see him as a right fielder and were unwilling to move Soriano from left. Dunn according to a couple sources also wanted to come to the Cubs over anybody else in that offseason.

It should be noted also that the club option for 2012 becomes guaranteed if Ramirez is traded. So anyone trading for him would know that if Ramirez does well he might opt out and if he does poorly or gets hurt they're on the hook for over 30 million over the next 2 seasons.

Lilly doesn't want to be traded, therefore he will serve up meatballs today. Lilly doesnt have a NTC, does he? In such case, suck it up, Ted. You can go pretty much anywhere after the season. He has a limited NTC. He can reject trades to 10 teams.

That's very true. Emotionally, I don't see how this core could compete. It's hard to see how 2-3 changes could dramatically change this team. But when looking at players position by position it's harder to ignore that could very well be the case. Right now the Cubs are weak going forward in the positions that have the most offense this year by a long shot (1B, RF). They are strong in the positions that are weak offensively (C, SS, likely 3B next year). And due to Lou, they have also been really bad at 2B. (BTW, for the other positions the Cubs should be better than most at LF and CF which neither have been highly offensive positions this year). But that's an advantage to them. They are weak at the strongest offensive position in the game which makes it easy to have a huge upgrade there. And they were so ridiculously weak at 2B that it makes it easy to upgrade there as well. And they don't have to try to find an upgrade for the positions where there is so little available talent.

Sorry. Meant to say that Ramirez will now likely stay with the Cubs (which is why I included him in the core for next year) and had a typo.

At the end of 2009, it looked like the 2010 offseason would be the official disaster point for the team. The three main consistent cogs Lee, Ramirez, and Lilly would all either be leaving or signed to bad contracts well past their useful point. That would leave a horrible core of players and a lot of money already spent. But is that true anymore? Look at who is dooming the 2010 team: Derrek Lee: .244/.333/.387 Ryan Theriot: .273/.311/.307 Aramis Ramirez: .219/.277/.414 Xavier Nady: .221/.291/.343 Jeff Baker: .246/.289/.397 Carlos Zambrano: 5.66 ERA in 55 2/3 innings Koyie Hill: .213/.253/.281 assorted relievers Lee is likely gone. Theriot could very well be gone either now or as a non-tender. Nady will be gone. Baker might be gone. Z will likely still be with the Cubs although they'll do their hardest to move them. It's hard to know what they'll do with Hill. And Ramirez will now likely stay with the Cubs and he's the likeliest to bounce back of all of them for a few reasons. And who are the Cubs losing that is good? Ted Lilly. And he's had a 4.07 ERA this year which is good but isn't the incredibly hard to replace that his 2009 numbers would have been. The players who are likely to come back happen to be all the ones producing while last year they were all the ones with big question marks. The 2010 year has been a disappointment but it could have been a lot worse. If Lee, Ramirez, and Lilly had been carrying this team while the others had struggled like last year than the future would have been horrible. Instead, the players who will be here longterm have been the bright spots. And a terrible year also might push Theriot out of the door who most people had in their terrible core projections for 2011 and beyond. So how good is the Cubs core now after you subtract the players that are leaving? If you were given a team of Soriano, Byrd, Fukudome/Colvin, Ramirez, Castro, Fontenot, ??, Soto, Dempster, Wells, Gorzelanny, Silva, ??, Marmol, Marshall, and Cashner either in the rotation or in the bullpen, how much would need to be added to make that team good?

.636 OPS is the last 30 days? His OPS in June was .780 and so far in July it is .727. Granted it is not as good as the 1.034 OPS he put up in May or the .965 OPS he put up in April, but I think it would be unrealistic to think that he wasn't going to have a slump all year long. Slump, or hitting as expected? It's probably not hitting as expected. He's had below average BABIP's in June and July and Colvin is a good bet to have an average BABIP or better. He has an ISOP of .250 for June and .214 for July so his major asset is still plenty there. Of course those below average BABIP's of course have also just offset and helped normalize what had been a very high BABIP in April/May. He's still hitting over his head a little bit with the HR/FB percentage needing to come down further (it has already come a few points from its peak). His BABIP is normal now and is being helped a little bit by the last month or two actually inching down his strikeout percentage. He still appears to be on track to be within 25 points either way of the 800 OPS mark at the end of the year and maybe a little more if he can continue to slowly cut out some strikeouts.

The games were decreasing on WGN steadily anyway, but I do think the fact that the Trib is gone accounts for the stark drop in games this year. I think there were 70-some WGN games in recent years and this year there are under 60. It looks like it was 60 regular season games last year and 63 the year before.

Still an average OPS. For a 20 year old rookie SS? Of the 40 SS's with at least 100 PA's, Castro has the 5th best BA, 6th best OBP, 7th best SLG, and the 5th best OPS. He is 70 points of OPS above the NL average at SS and 79 points over the MLB average. STILL AN AVERAGE OPS. Sadly, I'd bet that if the average Cubs fan was polled as to who they were excited more, Colvin or Castro, Colvin would probably have the lead. I don't think it's that sad really. Colvin has spent most of his time in the top of the order while Castro has been at the bottom most of the time. Colvin has probably provided more wow moments that stick into fan's heads with how long his home runs have gone. And it's not like Colvin is Ryan O'Malley out there...he is a legitimate prospect having a very good season. Obviously Castro is the one to be more excited about because of age and position, but I don't think it's a problem if any fan wanted to say Colvin. They are both good prospects who have shown both good tools and good production while in the major leagues. Neither one has had a whole lot of extra luck in the majors. To ask people to dig into minor league numbers to find out which one might have a better chance of sustaining their play is IMO unrealistic.

Still an average OPS. For a 20 year old rookie SS? Of the 40 SS's with at least 100 PA's, Castro has the 5th best BA, 6th best OBP, 7th best SLG, and the 5th best OPS. He is 70 points of OPS above the NL average at SS and 79 points over the MLB average.

Do NTCs apply to waiver claims, though? It sounds like they do from this discussion about the Rios deal (this comment is posted by Will Carroll): http://www.baseballprospectus.com/unfiltered/?p=1362

This could be an interesting paragraph...from the Baltimore Sun:

I agree. He's brutal. Where is Bob? He's watching his son play in Daytona. He's supposed to be back on Monday.

Bruce's blog today included this nice news:

He may very well do that since Lou tends to like partial-year splits for some reason and Halladay has a pretty big left/right platoon split this year. Whether he does that or not though, it's just nice to see Soto as the unquestioned starter again. He's started 11 out of the last 12.