MSG T

BAN HIM!!!

This. Let's not sign Fielder, and we'll just stand pat and wait for the perfect situation which may never come. If Fielder's not worth a couple of possibly mediocre years at the end of a seven year deal, who is? He's 27 years old and entering his prime. We are likely to get at least 4-5 years of elite production out of him. I've seen a lot of bellyaching about how we shouldn't sign him because 1-2 mediocre years at the end of a contract are going to somehow cripple the Cubs in the future, but no alternate suggestions. If not Prince, who is going to pop up in the next few years as the long term solution at first base? I also find it interesting how the general attitude on this board toward getting Prince changed as soon as Theo took over. it changed because people thought theo was going to draft a million elite players and we wouldn't need to sign free agents. it goes back to the meatball idea of "building a team the right way", which is closely related to "playing the game the right way". sure, any team that's in contention year after year is going to have some home-grown starters, but if you are a big market team, you have the luxury of signing elite talent for elite money. Why would people think that? That's not what he did in Boston. People thought that because of the comments made at Theo's PC about rebuilding the farm system. Unfortunately, those same people have consistently ignored pretty much every comment about "dual fronts" and "every chance to win is precious and we won't ignore that chance". Basically, they heard what they wanted to hear. And I can't believe we're having that same argument for the 500th time on here. Well, the rational side of me can't believe it. The realist aide understands how many dense people there are.

That is ridiculous. Why are people so freaking afraid? Did Soriano scare you that much? We're just past the midpoint of that bad contract and the team already has plenty of flexibility. Big contracts to big time players will not cripple a big market team. Yep.

Disagree. It's a low-risk, low-reward trade that, in the most likely scenario, has us losing extra games in 2012 because we are running out a terrible third baseman who is going to get $1.5 to $2.5 million more than he is worth. Best case scenario Stewart bats .300/.450/.550 with 40 home runs. Worst case scenario he bats .125/.200/.275 and runs over Starlin Castro with his car. Even the most notorious media douches as meh at worst on this trade. I think Kyles the only person out there who has an actual problem with it. Kyle would probably tell you he'd aim for Starlin but miss.

There's still need for OF help. They don't have a 160 game guy out there. Agreed. But this deal doesn't hurt their OF situation.

Interesting, but not that surprising I guess. Loosely related, has anyone ever looked to see if there's a correlation between velocity and injury? I know some people theorize about higher velocity putting more stress on the arm, but didn't know if anything had ever been examined. From what I've read about the biomechanics of it, assuming the same mechanics, throwing harder puts more stress on the arm. However, bad mechanics will put much more stress on the arm. For example, Randy Johnson would put more stress on his arm than Greg Maddux, even though they both had good overall mechanics. Stephen Strasburg, Mark Pryor, etc having bad timing issues and throwing hard, put way more stress on the arm than Johnson would. It just kind of depends on what the mechanical issue is as to whether it puts more stress on the elbow or shoulder. The mechanical issue is partly why throwing breaking pitches at a young age are blamed for arm problems. Young pitchers tend to not have solid mechanics, nor do they tend to be able to repeat their mechanics consistently. I'm not letting my son throw breaking pitches, yet, but I've got him working with a pitching coach I trust, and we're reinforcing the mechanics consistently, much more so than the speed or accuracy at this point. Pitching arm in vertical position when the front foot hits the ground so the shoulder isn't rotating while the body goes forward and rotates. With the consistent mechanics he's able to throw hard and accurate most of the time. I've definitely gotten an education on mechanics in the last couple of years with my son working on it pretty intensely. Now, I haven't watched Weathers throw to know if he has any mechanical flaws, so how this relates to him, I have no clue.

Sounds extremely unlikely. Where'd he go, Baltimore? They'll keep anybody around for a full season. Soriano and $12 mil per for Flaherty? OK, I'll get back to Stewart. He may never amount to anything, but he's got at least as good of a shot to get there as Colvin or LeMahieu. And I'm somewhat intrigued by Weathers. Not a great move, but not horrible.

8/50? I could be wrong but 8 years seems much longer than reality. And that's kind of why I was asking, I thought someone had linked something that gave an exmple of what was expected. I know it was $10 AAV or lower, but couldn't remember the length. Anyone have a clue how a posting fee that size would affect payroll this season? I'm assuming being a one time thing, it wouldn't affect it much, but maybe a slightly lower, or no raise, this year? Just wondering as there's people here that follow this more than I.

Not wanting to pour over every page here, but wasn't the "expected" contract to be something like 8/$50 with a $40-50 mil posting fee?

It's sad when people can't believe the truth. I'm not going back 20/30/40 pages to look for it, but wasn't there a quote, from Hoyer, in this thread stating that the Cubs were involved with both Pujols and Fielder? I'm guessing that's what is leading David to say that.

I'd guess either offseason between 2013-14 or by the deadline in 14. I think it will be a very challenging trade market for a 30-something middle infielder with that much guaranteed money left and likely even more injuries on his resume. I'm not saying it would be a good deal for the Marlins, just that they'll trade him. Most likely with little coming back and eating a bunch of $$. Someone will be desperate enough to take him while he's still somewhat productive, but the Marlins will have to eat a bunch of it.

I'd guess either offseason between 2013-14 or by the deadline in 14.

If they're as good as Mays's later years that you said didn't look good, they'll be plenty good. His WAR totals for his last four years. 1970 (age 39) - 5.4 1971 (age 40) - 6.4 1972 (age 41) - 2.2 1973 (age 42) - 0.0 I'd take that in exchange for the elite first 6 years at $25 mil per +/-.

I think it does less than with the other two, but you've got a giant field, usually with grass and outdoors, and all sorts of bang bang plays that can be seen so much clearer with a quality HD broadcast. Basketball's relatively small controlled environment doesn't really seem to benefit to the same extent. For me, the best part is seeing those bang bang plays, especially in slow motion. I remember the days when, at times, slow motion made it harder to tell which way the call should go because it was so blurry. That goes along with all of the traps, foul/fair calls, did the ball hit above or below the line etc. With HD, there's not much question left anymore.

Colvin sucked balls, Fukudome wasn't any worse than you could expect Dejesus to be. ?? I'd expect DeJesus (2.2 WAR) to do what he did last year and Fukudome (-.2 WAR) was way worse than that. A 2.4 WAR difference between the two is significant. I see Fukudome doing much better than that with the Cubs last year. I was going by fangraphs, which has Kosuke at -.2 and DeJesus at 2.2 last year.

I know it wasn't completely directed at me, but that's why I'd only do it for a "knock your socks off" type of package that helps both short and long term. I'd prefer to keep the guy, he's the type you build for the next 6-8 years around, but I consider it unrealistic to not think far enough out of the box to not consider trading certain people. Hell, I'd listen to offers on Castro. There's about a .1% chance I'd trade him, but it's not completely out of bounds. Adding a 2-4 type FA pitcher to what they already have, one major offensive improvement and a few smaller ones should get them to or somewhat above .500. To trade Garza, you'd have to add enough ML ready talent (either one great or a couple of good players) to offset that, in addition to them being long term answers. Otherwise he stays.

Unfortunately I caught the tail end of a few of the greats. They weren't so great when I saw them. Same goes for Aaron, and (I'm sorry) the White Sox version of Santo. There were some others I can't think of at the moment.

Colvin sucked balls, Fukudome wasn't any worse than you could expect Dejesus to be. ?? I'd expect DeJesus (2.2 WAR) to do what he did last year and Fukudome (-.2 WAR) was way worse than that. A 2.4 WAR difference between the two is significant.

My dad tells how I asked him who that was playing in the '73 Series, I was 4-5 at the time. He told me Willie Mays. I said "he sucks".

Holy crap, I complete forgot about Kosuke. It seems like years since he's been in Chicago. I'd also forgotten how bad he and Colvin were last year. Thanks for reminding me. :x

Raw, not wanting to stray too far of course, but as for the other parts you mentioned. I really think Headley could come close to replicating what they got from Ramirez last season. He's done that before, and getting out of SD I think he could average 3.5-4.0 WAR for the next few (3-5) years. That's not superstar status, but it's good, solid production. Fielder would be a significant improvement at 1B. Castro and Barney would hopefully be better. I'd see if I could find a cheap replacement for Barney, or wait until next off-season. The OF would be harder, not sure what to do with that mess. See if they can trade Soriano and go with Byrd/BJackson/DeJesus and hope for the best? Move Soto/Marmol for OF help and Byrd for a prospect? Not sure.

That's not true at all. Teams do it all the time. I can think of at least 3 teams that have won the World Series in the 00's that got by with less than what the Cubs could go out and get. The Diamondbacks, White Sox and Marlins. Exactly. The rumors we've heard alone would probably be enough to allow this team to contend. There are a lot of available players out there. 1B has been well documented, even if you have to bring back Pena at 1B, it's conceivable that the Cubs could get Headley, a guy like Gio Gonzalez, a young SP from the Rays, there's players that will become available if you get rid of Soriano and later in FA (Beltran). The Cubs would still need a lot to go right to seriously contend, but there are plenty of pieces out there to make it closer to happening. I think you're saying kind of the same thing I've said. They don't need to build a team that competes for the WS for 2012, they just need to get better. One or two bigger moves (say Fielder and Buehrle, possibly Darvish/Cespedes) and a few smaller ones (DeJesus, and say Headley) improves this team, to the point that they should, with neutral luck, finish slightly over .500. Another couple of bigger siginings next offseason, and a few small moves, and they should/could be back at the top of the Central by 2013. Looking at the number of teams that have made that kind of improvement, it's not that hard, you just need to have a rough plan in place and follow it. Which side are you on though re: Garza? If you are on the "trade Garza side" then why would you pay money for Buerhle and get rid of a better pitcher? The gains you made on offense are already minimal because you have to replace Ramirez also, but then you also remain stagnant on a pitching staff that gets rid of its best pitcher (Garza) for a downgrade (Buerhle). That's a team that finishes slightly better than last year, but looks better doing. I'm on the side of you trade Garza if the deal is too good to refuse, otherwise you keep him. Then, at the deadline next year you listen to offers, if someone blows your socks off, you deal him. If not, you hold onto him and try to work an extension next offseason. He's good enough, and young enough, to build around for the foreseeable future, but holds enough value that it's possible to improve the team, both short and long term, that trading him makes sense... for the right package. But again, it would have to make sense long AND short term. The Buehrle comment was in addition to Garza, not as a replacement. And I was only using him as an example. Heck, if they could get CJ instead, I'd be thrilled.

That's not true at all. Teams do it all the time. I can think of at least 3 teams that have won the World Series in the 00's that got by with less than what the Cubs could go out and get. The Diamondbacks, White Sox and Marlins. Exactly. The rumors we've heard alone would probably be enough to allow this team to contend. There are a lot of available players out there. 1B has been well documented, even if you have to bring back Pena at 1B, it's conceivable that the Cubs could get Headley, a guy like Gio Gonzalez, a young SP from the Rays, there's players that will become available if you get rid of Soriano and later in FA (Beltran). The Cubs would still need a lot to go right to seriously contend, but there are plenty of pieces out there to make it closer to happening. I think you're saying kind of the same thing I've said. They don't need to build a team that competes for the WS for 2012, they just need to get better. One or two bigger moves (say Fielder and Buehrle, possibly Darvish/Cespedes) and a few smaller ones (DeJesus, and say Headley) improves this team, to the point that they should, with neutral luck, finish slightly over .500. Another couple of bigger siginings next offseason, and a few small moves, and they should/could be back at the top of the Central by 2013. Looking at the number of teams that have made that kind of improvement, it's not that hard, you just need to have a rough plan in place and follow it.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2011/writers/tom_verducci/12/07/winter.meetings.wednesday/index.html So he basically knows what Jed and Theo are thinking, even if they don't? -Man, trying to edit on iPhone is hard.

Your #s 1, 3 and 4 might be doable, though I'll admit I have no idea how even those trades would be. #2 would get you laughed at by the Rays. I'd love to see it, but it wouldn't even start the conversation.