Backtobanks

Why exactly would we want Upton when our best prospect is a CF? When Jackson shows that he's he can handle the job, then we can flip Upton. If we got him for something along the lines of what WSR suggested, we didn't give up anything too valuable for him anyhow. He's currently doing well in AAA. How much more does he have to show? I think (and hope) that Jackson is the real deal, but there are lots of players who do well in AAA and never make it in the ML.

Why exactly would we want Upton when our best prospect is a CF? When Jackson shows that he's he can handle the job, then we can flip Upton. If we got him for something along the lines of what WSR suggested, we didn't give up anything too valuable for him anyhow.

And he's about to make too much money for the Rays. Your deal sounds good to me, but I think the Cubs would be reluctant to trade Barney until they're sure that the prospects can replace him.

Play him and hope that Rudy can teach him something now and during the offseason. If things don't improve, use him as part of a trade package. He might be a decent throw-in for the Rays in a trade to get Upton - power potential, a lot less money.

With all of the Moustakas vs. Vitters discussion, I guess we can agree that trading Garza (with extension) for him would be a bad move unless some really top prospects would be coming our way with him.

well he's been pretty bad for kc. granted he's still young and there's room to improve, but i guess the poster just doesn't think he's as good a prospect as most people think he is. i'm kind of in the same camp... i think there's a pretty good chance that he's a bust. Well let's trade him even up for Vitters.

In his power rankings column in today's Tribune, he suggests the new GM should sign Garza to a contract through 2014 with an option for 2015 (without NTC) and then work out a mega-deal with the Royals for Moustakas and other prospects. Obviously it would be great to get Moustakas, but I'm not sure who is going to pitch for the Cubs.

Of course, the Cubs being the Cubs Johnson will groom Jackson to run into the brick wall and it will end Jackson's career.

Wait, what? Can't Marlon Byrd or somebody that we're already paying "groom" Brett Jackson? Keeping Johnson will pay off as long as he can groom Brett Jackson into a .347/.385/.539 line offensively. I don't want Reed Johnson grooming Brett Jackson to have an OBP 40 points higher than his average, it will mean he has given up all his patience at the plate. Brett Jackson is going to be the second coming of Jesus. Reed Johnson should feel privileged he'll get the opportunity to witness him play I agree with you if his BA is .250, but I'll take it if Jackson is batting .347.

Wait, what? Can't Marlon Byrd or somebody that we're already paying "groom" Brett Jackson? Keeping Johnson will pay off as long as he can groom Brett Jackson into a .347/.385/.539 line offensively.

Breaking News: According to media sources any person who has been a GM, worked for a GM, dreamt of being a GM, or knows what the letters GM stand for is being considered for the Cubs' GM position. There has been no comment from anyone about anything. Stay tuned for updates. :lol:

Nolasco seems like one of those guys for whom a change of scenery could be HUGE. Given his propensity to have that "one big inning" it would seem something gets mechanically off that his pitching coaches haven't been able to pick up on. Or he could just be a headcase, who knows? Hopefully the new GM and/or manager can find a pitching coach to bring over. Riggins hasn't done anything to impress me.

Yeah, Danks would cost more. Multiple teams were asking about Danks at the trade deadline.

Rogers hinted that the WS have some serious trimming to do on payroll for next year. Apparently they don't have any SP prospects that are anywhere near ready, so I would assume pitching prospects would need to be included.

According to Phil Rogers (I know) on Chicago Tribune Live, the Cubs are considering a claim for Gavin Floyd. Not exactly Cy Young, but reasonably young and under team control for a few more years.

From MLBTR: •The Yankees have scouted Japanese pitcher Yu Darvish heavily, according to Sherman. Darvish, 25, "is coming" to the Major Leagues this offseason, according to one of Sherman's sources. I don't suppose we can outbid the Yankees, but we can dream.

Really trading one underachiever for another.

Maybe he has and we haven't heard about it yet. No one's gonna put a claim in but I'd just like to see him in another team's uniform. It seems to me that we've heard about others being put on waivers, but not Grabow.

Whew! I was worried that the Cubs put Grabow on waivers. I'm not quite sure why he hasn't been put out there.

Exactly my point. Ricketts wants a GM that has built a winning tradition by developing their own players (i.e. the Red Sox). It's certainly not his fault, but Hahn falls short in that category.

Just speculating. It's the usual "Who needs a 1B and has money to spend?" Then send out a tweet making it look like some inside information or brilliant analysis. Everyone of us could have send the same tweet.

He's been pretty bad this year. Teams taking him on are going to be doing so out of the hope that he rebounds at least somewhat next season. Remembering that he's an emotional roller coaster, he's been bad this year on a horrible team with no offense and pitiful defense. I think Zambrano on a winning team with good defensive and offensive support would be a completely different pitcher. Also, a change of scenary and a move from near the top of the rotation to near the back of the rotation certainly would lower the expectation level. If Z was emotionally upset, wouldn't he be trying to strike everybody out instead of lobbing pitches over the plate? That theory doesn't really fit with the reasons he's struggled this season. And the person who expects the most out of Zambrano is Zambrano-a change of scenery won't change that. He might improve working with an improved defense, but his BABIP isn't high especially compared to his LD percentage. I don't agree that a change of scenary won't change things. Lower expectations, not being "the man" in the clubhouse, not being coddled by the manager and front office, not being stalked daily by the local media, etc. might go a long way to improving his situation.

What exactly do you mean by "winning tradition"? The Rays have never won a WS and the Braves' last one was in 1995; at least the White Sox won back in 2005. Plus, the White Sox have only had two losing seasons since 2000. I'll grant you that they've only made three playoff appearances since 2000, but it seems kind of strange that you'd discount the White Sox like they haven't done anything of note recently. Also, regarding the White Sox farm system, the White Sox do not spend a whole lot on the draft or international signings. That really puts a damper on a team's ability to build a farm system. Plus, let's not forget Kenny Williams' propensity to trade prospects rather than building his teams from within. The Rays have done a great job of winning in the toughest division in baseball while spending next to nothing. They have developed a ton of young players along the way. The Braves have won and/or been in contention in a tough division consistently for decades while developing many young players. The WS have winning seasons in one of the weakest divisions in baseball while having a horrible farm system and trading away many of the few prospects they've had. Hahn is talented, but I would expect better candidates to be applying that seem to better fit the criteria that Ricketts has stated.

He's been pretty bad this year. Teams taking him on are going to be doing so out of the hope that he rebounds at least somewhat next season. Remembering that he's an emotional roller coaster, he's been bad this year on a horrible team with no offense and pitiful defense. I think Zambrano on a winning team with good defensive and offensive support would be a completely different pitcher. Also, a change of scenary and a move from near the top of the rotation to near the back of the rotation certainly would lower the expectation level.

Rick Hahn would be a great choice, but I'm not sure it would be a great PR move to take a guy from the White Sox to turn around the Cubs. I think Ricketts will have a long list of excellent choices, so a connection to the crosstown rivals might hurt Hahn's chances. Ricketts would be a complete and total moron if he decided not to hire Hahn on the basis that Hahn works for the White Sox. If he's got a list of 10-12 people who are better or equally qualifed as Hahn, then I could see passing over someone from your crosstown rivals. I would agree with you if there's no one on the list as qualified as Hahn. BTW, Ricketts wanted someone who comes from a winning tradition and has a proven record on player development. Compare the WS front office on those two points with the Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, and Braves. Obviously nothing has been decided, but there seems to be a lot of admiration pointed at the Red Sox organization as the way to go. That doesn't make any sense. I would agree with wanting a guy from a winning organization, but there's no way that the fact that he works for the White Sox would have any leverage in whether or not he's the guy. I expect some of the best and brightest GM candidates from teams that have a winning tradition to apply for the job. Using Ricketts' criteria, I would expect Hahn to be no better than the 5th or 6th best candidate. The WS don't have the winning tradition or the farm system that the Yankees, Red Sox, Rays, or Braves have. Assuming a qualified candidate (or candidates) applies from one of those teams (very likely), he (they) would have to be considered over Hahn. In addition to fitting the criteria better than Hahn, it would avoid the potential of poor PR.