CubColtPacer

It may not be an impossibility, but that plan is based on getting solid to good role players, or basically luck into them in the draft. The Heat will offer a 5 year 30 million dollar deal to the best role player on the market every single year. And who wouldn't want to sign with them because of the great chance of winning a championship? Their depth would continue to increase. And that is added on to the veterans that might sign on with them to win a title or the draft picks that will add some depth. Adding role players in the NBA is not difficult because of all the exceptions the NBA gives you. Teams don't need cap room to add role players. They only need cap room to add stars and Miami will have plenty of those.

IF Lebron goes to Miami, and I still have my doubts, then Wade/Bosh and James would be eating up the 90% of salary. Which means they willl have very little money to address 3 point shooting, interior defense, etc, etc, and Beasley and Chalmers don't have great trade value, but not enough to improve the team. In other words Miami would have to luck into some players to fill out the roster. James has to know this, that building a roster in Miami will be difficult and time consuming, and there is a chance that it could fail. The Bulls have a roster ready to compete now, Miami only has 2 superstars and two other players and 3 draft picks. I know all signs are pointing to Miami, but I think that is a smokescreen. within 2 years they are eating up 120% of the salary. James isn't a stupid he has to see that. Building a long-term franchise with James/Wade and Bosh is a impssibility, imo. Thus I think Miami talk is just that......talk. Not only is it not an impossibility, but Miami's way would likely be the ideal way to build a long term franchise. Their only possible problems would be in the short term not the long term.

Byrd would have one year left on his contract, and I don't see how that is a problem for Jackson at all. Byrd doesn't leave until after 2012. That's a long time with Jackson looking like he would be ready in mid 2011 or so. The Cubs could try to trade him at that point but that's of course not an easy guaranteed option. If there was a can't miss OF in this class, it might be worth it to take that risk. But there really isn't and the Cubs probably shouldn't clog the OF situation up again like that.

If Fukudome is traded, Colvin does make sense to start in 2011. He's likely to be as good as any corner OF that could be brought in on a 1 year deal. And with 2 other OF's that would still have multiple years left on their contract you don't want to bring in a 3rd with Jackson likely being so close at that point. So Colvin starts the year and you hope that one of him or Jackson can hold the position down. Now if Byrd was the one traded, that is a little bit of a different story. Then Fukudome slides back over to CF and the Cubs would probably be looking to add an impact bat in the corner OF position. Colvin plays 4th OF and Jackson replaces Fukudome either sometime during 2011 or after 2011 when his contract is up. Of course one of the best options for competing in 2011 is for the Cubs to do what they are doing now and giving all 4 outfielders AB's. Getting a big bat at 1B and Ramirez coming back would make the Cubs contenders (especially if the Cubs also settled 2B in some way). How the Cubs approach 2011 may be dependent on what they think Ramirez can do as he is the big key to that season. Whatever they do, adding in a long-term contract in either the starting rotation or the OF will likely be a mistake.

Probably for as long as he needs unless he is completely overwhelmed. They clearly want to challenge him. And right now his numbers are at least somewhat due to a terrible BABIP (.244).

I'm withholding judgment until I see where James goes. I still say Chicago is the best place for him if he wants to win. If he goes to Miami it will be James/Bosh/Wade and then a bunch of minimum salary scrubs. They'll compete, but they will have absolutely NO depth on their bench. If he goes to New York he'll get all the money and fame he wants but I'm not sure that Stoudamire/James is going to be enough to win anything. However, if he comes to Chicago he'll have James/Rose/Noah plus plenty of money to go out and get either Lee or Boozer and maybe another role player or two. Not to mention they already have Deng under contract; not that that's a huge draw, but it's more than Miami has. That's really only true for this year and somewhat next year. As time goes on, their bench will fill out and they'll likely have plenty of depth to go along with the 3 stars and that's a much better situation than any other of the cities can offer. Of course, the money is not likely to work out to let all 3 of them come in the first place.

Miami would be allowed to use the mid-level exception every year and they can spread that around to multiple players if they want. Or they can sign all the players they want to the minimum. That plus draft picks would be plenty of roster turnover for them. I don't think Miami will get all 3 players, but if they did they still would have flexibility to fill out a team over time. what kind of draft picks are thy going to get? NG guys that can barely breathe out of their mouths on an nba floor. my point is this idea that they can keep bringing in waves of nba mercs is just a myth. keep in mind that by year 5 of the contracts, those three guys will be making like 80 mil. miami better be successful. Sure, they are very unlikely to find stars at the end of the first round, but they wouldn't need stars. They would just need players to give them good minutes and there are plenty of draft picks around that range that can give them that. By year 5 their payroll would likely be even more than that. They would have 3 to 4 players signed to mid-level deals, probably a player or two signed to the low level exception and a couple of draft picks. They would have to go way into the luxury tax, but every year their team could just get deeper and deeper.

Miami would be allowed to use the mid-level exception every year and they can spread that around to multiple players if they want. Or they can sign all the players they want to the minimum. That plus draft picks would be plenty of roster turnover for them. I don't think Miami will get all 3 players, but if they did they still would have flexibility to fill out a team over time.

Nice to see the swings for Ramirez look better the last few days. How he looks in the second half will be big for the Cubs chances next year.

If we're talking about a single season, perhaps, but the record is pretty telling over an 8 year period. That's assuming a GM is consistent over an 8 year period which I am not sure is the case. There certainly could be a disconnect between what he has done in the past and what he might do in the future as there is evidence of learning. That's especially true when the philosophy above him has changed so dramatically from what it was earlier in his tenure. An analysis of his individual components might yield whether he would fit better under the new philosophy then he did under the old one.

I'm really not sure what Silva is worth. IMO, teams don't usually like to take risky players who have multiple years left on their contracts in a trade. At the same time, the Cubs shouldn't pay much of Silva's contract at the deadline. There's no reason for it. The Cubs are going to have to pay Silva 8 million between 2011 and 2012 (6 million for 2011 plus 2 million buyout in 2012). He's becoming likely to post an ERA under 4 for 2010. The Cubs will very likely be able to unload his contract in the offseason and pay no more than 2 million. And if he continues to pitch close to as well as he has for the rest of the year the Cubs could potentially do even better.

I agree with this somewhat. Most people though hadn't really seen Colvin before this year. He hit 16 home runs in under 500 AB's in 07. He hit only 14 in over 500 AB's in 08 but it was uncertain how much of that was slowed by the problems that led to the TJS. He then only hit 1 home run in Daytona in 114 AB's but 13 in Tennessee in just over 300 AB's. And then of course he added all that muscle over the offseason. The power potential was always the thing that was going to potentially save Colvin. The numbers for Tenessee were a welcome sight but it was uncertain what that meant with all the other confusion in his numbers. So to see him hit a large number of home runs is very encouraging. To see him hit them the way he has (the fact that so few of them have been cheap) is perhaps more encouraging. Before the season based on the numbers, Colvin was probably a 10-20 home run player in the majors. Now based on both the eye test and the numbers he's put up, he's probably more of a 15-30 home run guy. Right now he's on pace for 44 over a 600 AB season which will come down sharply when his HR/FB ratio balances out. With so many more factors than normal influencing the data, evaluating Colvin is still a work in progress. We know the basics of his game, but the particulars have a lot more variability than a normal player. But I would definitely agree that in general his strengths and weaknesses have not changed.

Hilarious, Castro has been mediocre (710 OPS and 3rd most errors in the NL) and if anything is the guy on the cubs who needs to go back to minors and work on things. His fielding needs work and his bat has been frankly bad since his kosuke-like debut. But let's send down the guy who currently has the highest OPS on the team. Brilliant I'd rather he'd have stayed in the minors, too. And again, I haven't advocated sending Colvin back to the minors this year; I'm talking about having him down there starting full time working on the flaws in his offense next season. Castro, quite frankly, is more talented than Colvin and is much more likely to be able to develop at the ML level. Colvin's not going to be able to work on his strikeout rate well at the minor league level. It was already acceptable in the minor leagues. He needs to see major league pitching if he's going to be able to make progress on that now (both to catch up to the hard fastball and the sharp breaking balls that he struggles with at times. He's not going to see many of either of those pitches in AAA). Colvin definitely has some worrying numbers. The walk rate needs to not slide any further or will be a major concern. The strikeout rate is too high (although it has been slowly sliding down). His BABIP doesn't worry me anymore. It was ridiculously unsustainable but it's fallen so much. At .319 now, that's the type of BABIP Colvin can maintain because he usually makes good contact with the ball when he actually does make contact. And the HR/FB number is definitely unsustainable. Most of Colvin's HR's leave the park so fast though that even if he doesn't get quite as strong of contact on them in the future they'll likely just increase his singles or doubles rate. Colvin's probably still a .775-.825 OPS player who can play all 3 OF positions. If he can lower his strikeout rate to 20-22% he could be a little more than that. He's likely always going to be a mistake hitter. He's the type of player you typically want to stay away from in free agency because his numbers will bounce around from year to year but he would likely be just fine as a cheap starter and he isn't so good that keeping him as a 4th OF isn't a horrible decision either. A smaller market team would likely find more value for Colvin but he'll probably be fine with whatever role the Cubs decide to put him in.

I've wondered about that myself and I'm not sure if that statement is true. Cubs overall: .253/.319/.392 (13th BA, 13th OBP, 13th SLG, 13 OPS, 14th runs scored) Cubs without Lee and Ramirez at all: .263/.326/.404 (4th BA, 10th OBP, tied 8th SLG, 10th OPS) If you take Lee and Ramirez's 3 year averages and apply them to this year (giving them only the number of at-bats they've had this year): Cubs with regular Lee and Ramirez .271/.336/.426 (2nd BA, 4th OBP, 3rd SLG, 3rd OPS) Somebody can check my calculations, but I'm pretty sure they're close. Lee and Ramirez are the difference between this team being really good and really bad this year.

And no, it doesn't have the opportunity to happen all the time in soccer. Can you give *one* other example of a flagrant handball by the last defender stopping a goal? Ghana-Australia was a similar situation to today. The defender stopped it right on the goal line. He was red carded for handball and Gyan converted the penalty kick.

Long term? Almost all the big contracts are set to expire by 2012 at the latest. Soriano and Z are the only contracts longer than that. There should be plenty of cap room after next season and certainly after 2012. Short term, you're right. We probably won't be very good this year or next at this point. 2013 is a long time from now. A long time. He meant by 2012. That's only a year and a half of baseball away. After 2012 the Z contract also is off the books. Although he did miss that the Cubs will also have Byrd and likely Dempster in 2012 but the Cubs will almost certainly want both of them. Last year at this time it was much worse than it is now. At that time, it was 18 months until some big contracts went away (Lee, Aramis, and Lilly) and those were 3 of the cornerstones of the team. Now the Cubs have gone a year without adding any big contracts and will have a whole lot of money coming off both this year and next year. They have a whole lot of flexibility. They could win big by next year if they wanted to but it wouldn't be the smartest move. With smart moves they'll be ok next year and strong by 2012. I actually just didn't word my post well. You did a much better job. That said, five of the big contracts we have through 2012 (Soriano, Z, Dempster and Byrd) have averaged a combined 10.4 WAR over the past three seasons. Their collective WAR this year is 7.6. They've been valuable and could still be in 2011 and 2012. Shark is due $6.5 in 2012, however. Samardzija's contract is a club option for that year. So unless he comes up and blows everybody away as a starter next year it won't be picked up.

Long term? Almost all the big contracts are set to expire by 2012 at the latest. Soriano and Z are the only contracts longer than that. There should be plenty of cap room after next season and certainly after 2012. Short term, you're right. We probably won't be very good this year or next at this point. 2013 is a long time from now. A long time. He meant by 2012. That's only a year and a half of baseball away. After 2012 the Z contract also is off the books. Although he did miss that the Cubs will also have Byrd and likely Dempster in 2012 but the Cubs will almost certainly want both of them. Last year at this time it was much worse than it is now. At that time, it was 18 months until some big contracts went away (Lee, Aramis, and Lilly) and those were 3 of the cornerstones of the team. Now the Cubs have gone a year without adding any big contracts and will have a whole lot of money coming off both this year and next year. They have a whole lot of flexibility. They could win big by next year if they wanted to but it wouldn't be the smartest move. With smart moves they'll be ok next year and strong by 2012.

Neither. He hasn't thrown more than 47 pitches in a month and he's thrown 77 so far today.

Once upon a time, sure. Now, not so much. Last year one pitcher got a multiyear contract @ $12M per year (John Lackey). The pitching quality last year on the market was not good either. Obviously salaries have been depressed somewhat but it was also an off year more like 2007 than 2006 or 2008 (where only Carlos Silva got a multi-year deal). Randy Wolf was the second best pitcher on the market last year and got 3 years 29.75 million. He's inferior to Lilly and was only just over a year younger when he signed his deal. That should be the starting point for Lilly's contract and he could definitely get a decent bit more than that.

Soto has roughly 59 PA and a 950 OPS in June, Hill is at 35 and 688. RIght, and Im pretty sure the majority of Soto's PA have come against all the leftys we have faced this month. Hill has had the majority of PA vs RH pitchers that we have faced this month. I think you're probably right. Unfortunately Lou seems to be looking at incorrect stats again. I know they've mentioned the fact that Hill has a better BA against right-handers as a reason he is starting a decent amount. I also wonder if the fact that Hill's BA is over 300 points higher than Soto with RISP is factoring into it. That seems like something Lou would probably look at with all his team's struggles in that department this year. I just wish he would look at the bigger picture and not things with small sample sizes that are going to change eventually.

Fair enough. We have a ton of young and/or mediocre options for the rotation next year. We have so many squeaky wheels on this team...Lilly's money probably should be spent elsewhere. Unless one of Cashner, Diamond, and Jackson steps up and performs at a very high level, our rotation next year could be really bad. If they put that Lilly money towards a difference making bat, fine by me. But if not, I think you have to seriously consider bringing him back. It's not like this is some stud pitching staff that can just afford to let guys get away and still rule the NL. It's basically a middle of the road staff, and this year we had the same argument about all the guys who should be able to fill roles. This rotation has not performed like a middle of the road staff. Their better than average ERA is their worst part. They have been excellent in just about every category. They strike out lots of people, they walk very few, they don't allow much of a batting average (which of course makes their OBP and OPS allowed very good). They've allowed an exactly average number of home runs. And those peripherals aren't really because of Lilly as his peripherals have been poor compared to everyone else on the staff.

Fair enough. We have a ton of young and/or mediocre options for the rotation next year. We have so many squeaky wheels on this team...Lilly's money probably should be spent elsewhere. Unless one of Cashner, Diamond, and Jackson steps up and performs at a very high level, our rotation next year could be really bad. It could be, but it isn't very likely to be. The 4 guys you mentioned are all questionable, but they also are all more likely to be above average than below (Silva's the most questionable one, but the changes to his pitching style almost definitely will have positive effects even if he won't absolutely dominate against left-handed hitters like he has so far this year). It is likely that 1 and maybe 2 of them will have a bad year, but the 4 of them together combined with a good bet to be well above average in Dempster and you have an above average rotation. It would take some bad luck for them to be below average. I'm definitely fine with offering Lilly arbitration though if the Cubs don't trade him. They can pocket the draft picks and it's not a problem if he somehow decides to come back. Sooner or later though the Cubs will have to open some rotation spots for all these pitchers. Silva's a great choice for that as the remaining contract that the Cubs have to pay is not that big any longer. Lilly could also be an option and it remains to be seen what the Cubs will do with Z. They definitely have too much money tied up in the rotation on the major league level when that's the biggest organizational strength.

Through 10 innings, Tennessee has 9 hits. They have 10 walks, a hit by pitch, 2 guys reached on errors, another guy moved up on an error, and they are 6 out of 7 in stolen bases. And they only have 3 runs thanks to going 2 for 24 so far with RISP and leaving 16 runners on. Jackson is 2 for 5 with a walk. Vitters is 0 for 4 with a walk. Bibens-Dirxx had a strong game: 6 IP, 3 H, 1 R, 1 ER, 2 BB, 7 K Shafer had an up and down debut: 2 IP, 3 H, 1 BB, 2 K. He is responsible for a man on 3rd with nobody out in the 10th though so that will likely be his 1st run given up and the loss.

I think the main worry was Saturday if Silva had a short outing. It was a tie game so they had Cashner go 2 innings on Saturday. He was the only bullpen pitcher that pitched on Saturday. Since they hadn't pitched Saturday (and Marmol hadn't pitched since Thursday), Marshall and Marmol were ready to go 1 inning on Sunday to secure the win. Maybe Marshall shouldn't have been used Sunday but I don't think it was a big concern. And that's the only non tied game the Cubs have played in the 3 that Schlitter has been up with the club (not to mention that he pitched last night). After the Cubs only had to use 1 pitcher out of the bullpen Saturday the worry was pretty much over and only using two different pitchers Sunday made everyone available by last night.

Byrd's really the only one that's stunk over most of June, but then you run into the issue of playing Colvin too much in CF. That's a strange statement to make. Byrd was definitely hotter in the first half of June and has slumped the second half. At the same time, he still has actually improved his season numbers in June. And he's definitely been better than the other two outfielders as Soriano has had a very bad month and Kosuke has had a horrific month albeit in limited playing time.