MSG T

While I agree with not wanting Young, Bradley has way more plate discipline than DY, and Young is, at least at this point of his career, nowhere near the hitter Bradley is. He'd have to improve a lot to be a poor mans Milton Bradley.

This. I would be happy with an offseason of zero player moves, but hiring Fredi and Dave Duncan. Me too.

You'd think if Wells was that bad they'd already have the book on him. He's pitched almost the whole season in the majors and had pretty consistent success. I wasn't a believer in the beginning, but at this point I think he has a pretty good chance of being a decent starter. I am expecting nothing better than a 07'/08' Jason Marquis type season out of Wells next year. I'd take that from my #5 starter who's making #5 money.

You'd think if Wells was that bad they'd already have the book on him. He's pitched almost the whole season in the majors and had pretty consistent success. I wasn't a believer in the beginning, but at this point I think he has a pretty good chance of being a decent starter. I am expecting nothing better than a 07'/08' Jason Marquis type season out of Wells next year. I'd take that from my #5 starter who's making #5 money.

Actually, the Cubs are 10,102 - 9,533 without Bradley in the lineup.

](*,) I'm 100% sure there are plenty of people out there that think that would be fantastic. I'm also 100% positive that I don't want Miles on the team, so why would Rowand be a good idea.

I'd take 25 starts and 150 IP of Harden over 50 relief appearances and 60 IP of Harden.

Why not? He can play the OF. He just doesn't play it very well. I'm not 100% sure, but if all of the involved players have cleared waivers, I think they can still be traded. At this point the wouldn't be eligible for the post season rosters, but the Cubs and TB aren't going anywhere anyway. I'm almost positive the can be traded if they have passed through waivers. :-k I'm pretty sure everyone is talking offseason trades. Oh, I realize that. I actually quoted the wrong person. Someone had mentioned that it would be a couple of months before we knew anything, and I was just pointing out that, in this circumstance, it might still be possible for it to go down quickly. Not that it would, just that it is possible.

Why not? He can play the OF. He just doesn't play it very well. I'm not 100% sure, but if all of the involved players have cleared waivers, I think they can still be traded. At this point the wouldn't be eligible for the post season rosters, but the Cubs and TB aren't going anywhere anyway. I'm almost positive the can be traded if they have passed through waivers.

=D>

I don't think we'll really know until the ownership is finalized and Ricketts gives some indication of where the payroll will be next year. I operating under the assumption there will be a small boost, but that they won't be able to afford any big pieces. That way I'm not disappointed in January when they can't make many moves. If I'm wrong and the bump payroll $20 mil, great. But again, I don't think anyone really knows that yet. Personnally, I want them to get the best players they can afford. If they can afford a big stick for RF, great. If the best the can do is Cameron for CF and move Kosuke to RF, well, it's not the greatest idea, but it's not a bad one either.

Because of some of the bickering I haven't read every post in the thread, so this may have been addressed. Let's say they can afford Cameron, say 1/$6-7 mil, and move Fuku to RF, would it be a good thing to platoon him(Fuku) with Fox. I realize the D would take a hit with Fox out there, but would the offensive boost of him hitting LHP instead of Kosuke be worth it? You'd be talking about roughly 1/3 of the PAs, so I don't know where the advantage would be. Just thinking out loud. Also, I like the idea of going back to a straight platoon with Baker/Fonts, assuming they are limited in payroll and can't add a SS or 2B. It may not be ideal, but I'd have to think there'd be a decent improvement out of 2B numbers doing that. Just those two things, if they are truly limited, should improve the offense and defense, plus give them better options off the bench than they started the season with. Granted if Soriano and Soto don't turn it around, it won't matter much anyway.

http://www.fangraphs.com/statss.aspx?playerid=1070&position=OF#value Take a look at the last two columns. Dollars is how much money he was worth. Salary is self explanatory. So if I'm reading that right, he's been worth more than he's been paid every year but 2005?

I'm not watching the game and don't want to take anything away from Iowa but a Gronkowski-less Arizona is bad. Yea, but a Bulaga-less, Moeaki-less, Hampton-less, DJK-less Iowa team just kicked their asses. In case you don't know, those are all Iowa offensive starters. None of those four played today. Gronkowski being gone didn't kill AZ's offense, Iowa's defense did.

Same here.

I have a problem with it. Pre-prime hitters are an incredibly valuable commodity. The only one the Cubs have actually gone out and acquired is Ramirez, whom they got because Pittsburgh couldn't make payroll and had to dump contracts. Add to that their insistence on targeting specific types of players, and quite often the wrong type of player and it's just incredibly frustrating. That I agree with. If they were merely targeting good players, and not worrying about handedness or speed or versatility, I wouldn't have as big of a problem with it. My biggest concern is when the overpay for mediocre guys that, even with that roster linked by the OP, could easily be filled by guys they already have. For example signing Miles for $5 mil, when the already have 2-3 guys that could give them what Miles does, and do it for way less money. I do see what your saying, though, and would like to see them produce position players, at least occassionally.

As a side note, this new format is throwing me off. It's not bad, just looks weird on first view. OK, now it's gone. Anyone now if this is at my end or the NSBB end? Weird.

I couldn't agree more with the last sentence, although not entirely for the NLCS and WS reasons they list here. The overpaying for for offense is definitely a part of it. Identifying some senseless factor like LH middle of the order bat or speed etc. instead of just getting good ballplayers is the biggest reason. To their credit though, that's kind of been the plan all along. They decided that in order to be like Atlanta they'd draft/develop pitchers and trade for/sign bats. It hasn't worked out all that great, other than the pitchers part. They have been at the bottom of the league in runs scored for much of the decade. Hopefully the Wilken guys do better. I understand, and I realy don't have a big problem with that basic idea. I just don't like the reasoning for targeting a specific player(LH power bat, speed, versatility etc.). It seems like Hendry narrows his possibilities needlessly when looking at FA, instead of trying to get the best possible player. For example, instead of looking for the best possible 2B, he looks for the best possible LH, fast, top of the order 2B. In some cases being that particular would cause him to not even consider the best player available. Then, on top of that, he'll bid against him self and offer 5/$45 when the next best offer is 3/$18. I don't have a problem with building around trades and FA, just the method they use in determining the players they acquire.

I couldn't agree more with the last sentence, although not entirely for the NLCS and WS reasons they list here. The overpaying for for offense is definitely a part of it. Identifying some senseless factor like LH middle of the order bat or speed etc. instead of just getting good ballplayers is the biggest reason.

I actually liked it much better than the "everyone jump up and down while surrounding the guy that hit it" celebration. The fact that Prince weighs about 3 bills is why it was funny. It wouldn't have been realistic for someone like Juan Pierre(for more than one reason). But with Prince jumping, you'd expect the earth to shake enough for them all to fall down.

Does this mean I should start making a "Ricketts MVP" sign?

i'd be fine with them doing this even if it meant eating half his salary in the deal. I agree. In fact, I'd almost be willing to give him up without getting anything in return. That almost will turn to a definitely if next year looks anything like this year. Another $45 mil for him not to play for the Cubs is way better than paying another $90 mil to play for the Cubs. Even if this is just a bad year, and turns it around some next year, those last 3-4 years are still going to be UGLY. If he's already started down that slope, ugh.

http://www.northsidebaseball.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=55307&start=25 IBL. I've always wanted to do that.

So evidently they're not. Who were the multiple sources, Stone and Kaplan? Edit: This was directed at the article, not you PCP.

Good work, Rob. Although, when I saw the thread title my first thought was... oh crap, who's hurt now?