jersey cubs fan

no

Don't kid yourself about "3 B prospects". They were 3 of the top 8 in the Sox farm system. Being 3 of of the best in a bad bunch doesn't make them blue chippers.

I wouldn't characterize it as everybody thinks is only a marginal upgrade. I believe it's likely to be fairly sizable. As you say, not as significant as replacing the glaring hole at SS with even average production, but valuable nonetheless. I'm not overly excited about Roberts, but I think he would be a very solid addition to the lineup. True, not everyone. I sort of fell into that trap of attributing the opinions of a few vocal posters to the whole board, but it sure does seem like a lot of posters are just brushing off Roberts like he's nothing. I think very few people are brushing him aside as nothing. It appears to me that most people who don't like the potential trade are far more concerned in the cost of that upgrade, rather than the upgrade itself. Most people seem to be acknowledging he would be a significant asset, but many of them don't like the idea of emptying out the back end of the already questionable rotation in order to get him. I don't like the idea of just trading guys because they may appear to be blocked or not worth much to the Cubs.

I wouldn't characterize it as everybody thinks is only a marginal upgrade. I believe it's likely to be fairly sizable. As you say, not as significant as replacing the glaring hole at SS with even average production, but valuable nonetheless. I'm not overly excited about Roberts, but I think he would be a very solid addition to the lineup.

I don't know, but isn't a significant amount of this eating into already existing camera/photog areas that are fenced off from the field and essentially out of play anyway?

No. No it has not been the one glaring need. Leadoff hitter is not a position, it's just a spot in the order that any of the 8 position players can fill. This team's most glaring need for a very long time has been walks, and players who are both willing and capable of taking them. A little more generally, they've lacked OBP. And to the extent that a new hitter can significantly improve the OBP by replacing somebody who is already here, that player would have considerable value to the Cubs.

I think it has a lot more to do with Hendry's whacked out value system for baseball assets. He places value on things that don't deserve to have value, such as a players veteranness, or the fact that somebody was once good a long time ago, or achieved some level of perceived success for any duration, no matter how short. Hendry views pitcher's wins as a very telling stat, which is troubling in and of itself. But he does so without paying attention to losses. A 15 win pitcher is a 15 win pitcher regardless of whether he's 15-16 or 15-6. Somebody who is pitching like crap, not striking anybody out, but "finding ways to win" a handful of games despite horrible peripherals (ie, he's lucky) is a pitcher who "just gets the job done" to somebody like Hendry.

The Trachsel deal was trouble from day 1. They gave up talent for no good reason. Even if those guys weren't very good, they were tradable assets, or competent bodies to have as backup plans for the future. Plus, Trachsel on the team makes them worse. It was so painfully obvious from the time it was first rumored to be a deal to the time he threw his last (hopefully this time) pitch as a Cub.

I don't get the complaints about the move for the White Sox. Sure, it doesn't much affect their playoffs chances in 2008, but it's not solely a 2008 story. I'd be very happy to turn 3 B prospects into a solid young major leaguer who is under team control at a fair price for several years.

The Blackhawks season, much like this thread, is coming dangerously close to ending early. 6 points out of a playoff spot, 13th place in the west (closer to last than 8th). They may be in the middle of a free-fall, losing 5 straight, and 11 of their previous 16. The Blackhawks are now sub .500 on the road, and the toughest part of the road schedule is yet to come, with 16 road games in their next 23, through the end of February. While I understand that this organization may feel pressured to do all it can to capitalize on the renewed fan interest, I hope Tallon doesn't do anything stupid by giving up promising youth to acquire some fringe veterans in hopes of fighting for that 8th spot. The playoffs would be nice, but the Stanley Cup is the ultimate goal. I just don't see a likely first round knockout being all that beneficial in the long run. Sure, it might be nice to give the kids playoff experience, but I don't see fan interest in 2009 and beyond being the least bit affected by whether or not they qualify in 2008. Other than the money they'd make from a few home playoff games, it's just not all that important to the future. This isn't to say I don't want them to make the playoffs, or make any deals. I just don't want to see the hockey equivalent of Garland for Karchner because the GM is desperate. Hopefully they can start to tread water and not lose anymore ground, then get back their injured stars and make a last minute run.

Go ahead and keep thinking that. Kendall had one month where he was something other than completely worthless. He sucked the rest of the time. He's a 33 year old catcher with a ton of miles on him already, who will turn 34 next year. He's had some horrible injuries in his career and is a completely useless catcher behind the plate. He sucks. It would be difficult for Soto to be as bad.

I would agree, I just see no way it happens, until, or unless Blanco's season ends.

Yes, the guy who took fewer pitches than anyone else on the team has a "good eye at the plate." never let facts get in the way of a good argument They don't have to be mutually exclusive. Theriot can have a very discriminating eye, but at the same time not see too many pitches because he doesn't have the pop to make pitchers pay, so they pound the strike zone against him. And at the same time, you can have a discriminating eye, but still employ an overly aggressive approach at the plate. Weak hitters with patience can still see multiple pitches. Pitchers may not be afraid of him, but they are still going to try to get the guy out on their pitches, and he lets them.

As a non 40-man roster guy who is a long way away from ever making any money, and who seemingly turned his career around (if only a little) as a 19-year old in A ball, I could see Beane having interest. If Burke was overvalued, and therefore unattractive to Beane, because he was highly touted for physical tools and due money he probably wasn't worth at draft time, maybe now he's more properly valued. Now that he's just another low-paid prospect whose star has faded, Beane might find it attractive to get a guy like Burke thrown into a trade. Even if he doesn't envision him playing for the A's in the future, Beane knows Hendry is playing for 2008, while Oakland is not. Burke does nothing for the 2008/2009 Cubs, unless he's traded. If he's worth 35 cents, maybe Beane can get him for a quarter and trade him 2-3 years from now for a dollar. You mean Low A ball, Boise---LD%=10.45, BABIP=.317 And in Hawaii IIRC he finished with a BABIP around 600 Sure, Beane might take Burke, but hes nothing more than a throw in until he can prove that his #s are real. Yeah, I was trying to think of names that could be throw-ins after the better prospects who have actually done stuff. I don't really see a match myself, but if somebody is trying to find a deal for Blanton and Street.

Click the quote button on this post, then put your cursor at the end of this text, after [ /quote] and start writing there.

So did I.

I could see where it could be construed as a diss to Cub fans. But, the guy's job is to make the Blackhawks look good and build some hype. I guess the "meathead" fans. Personally, I take no offense. I don't know if the perceived diss is supposed to be that Cubs fans wouldn't stand out in the cold for Prior or Wood's autograph, even when they were at the height of their popularity, or if it's saying Prior and Wood wouldn't lower themselves to signing autographs out in the cold. Nevermind that hockey is a cold weather sport played in the winter, which invariably means public appearances are going to involve cold weather, whereas baseball is a warm weather summer sport and players are going to be in demand for appearances during the warmer weather. Either way, it's a meaningless statement. It's a marketing man doing what he does best blowing smoke and BS. It's inconsequential, just like this exec who moved to the Blackhawks. Cubs fans shouldn't think twice about it. It's nice for the Blackhawks to move into the 20th century and actually try to sell their product (where marketing people have some value), but the Cubs are way beyond that stage of the game.

That would be interesting. Cubs seemingly have 2 guys who would be good for the #2 spot (Fukudome and Lee if his power stays in 06-07 range), 2 guys for the #5 spot (Ramirez, Soriano), 2 7th hitters (Soto, Derosa) and 2 8th hitters (Pie, Cedeno/Theriot) I think you're possibly underrating our hitters a little bit. If we truly had two 7 hitters and 2 8 hitters and no legitimate middle of the order hitter, then we would have a well below average offense, and we had an average offense last year. Ramirez and Soriano have been top 30 hitters each of the last 2 years. That at least deserves a #4 ranking for each even if it doesn't deserve a #3 (Ramirez more than Soriano). Fukudome is a #2. Lee is either a #2 or #4, but remember he has only showed a lack of power in 1 half of a season. Soto is a #6 or #7 depending on performance. DeRosa has been an average #6 hitter the last 2 years. Pie could be a #6, #7, or #8 depending on what he does this year (probably a 7 or 8). Theriot is a #8. I think we may be getting a little hung up on number designations. Ramirez and Soriano are like 5 hitters, because both have power but neither has any patience. An ideal #4 is going to OBP a lot close to .400 than either of these guys. But it doesn't mean neither could hit there (Ramirez much more so than Soriano) and have the team succeed. Lee has really only hit for great power in one year. Now that's he's recovered from the broken wrist, and shown to be back where he was most of his career, far away from an elite #3 type hitter (which he was in 2005, without question), he is an ideal 2. But it doesn't mean he can't hit 3 and have the team succeed. Part of the problem the Cubs have had in recent years, when their offense was, at its best, only average, is that they've rarely had an ideal hitter for any of their positions, aside from when Ramirez was hitting 5th, and Sosa/Lee were at their best hitting in the middle of the order. They've never had an ideal top of the order guy. They've always been missing either an ideal 3, 4, or 5 (or more than 1 of those), and they've even struggled finding "ideal" 6 hitters. Moises was never an ideal cleanup hitter, At their best they've always had guys a little out of ideal position. As long as you aren't saddled with black holes, you can still thrive as an offense on the whole without those ideal hitters. The bigger problem, of course, has just been the overall lack of OBP throughout the lineup, specifically the lack of willingness/ability to take walks. If they had more patient hitters, even if they weren't in their "ideal" spot, the offense as a whole would have been a heck of a lot better, and not just in the average years, but in the dysmal years as well. As things stand right now, this offense would rock with an ideal 3 or 4 hitter. Somebody who hit for average, OBP and power would allow them to do something like Soriano, Fukudome, Lee, Somebody, Ramirez, DeRosa, Soto, Pie (or if that somebody played CF, switch out Pie with Theriot), and really be a great offense. But they don't have that somebody, so they need to maximize what they do have and eliminate the black holes, and find a way to be a top 5 offense.

It was in the Vineline and the complete list will be in the Chicago Tribune sports section the Sunday prior to the convention. You all are excited to go and I am thrilled out of my mind not to go this year. It hasn't been the same since October 2003. The fans are different and it is oversold and packed with people. It has forced the players to hide from the fans rather than hang out in Kitty O'Sheas and talk at the end of each day's activities. Even the former players hide because the fans are different now. It used to be a lot of fun but not anymore to me. I can't imagine I would enjoy this thing. What do you mean about fans changing? Are they new fans who don't understand baseball, or are they fans that actually, like, expect the Cubs to win lots of baseball games and can't understand why they don't?

More seating is a good thing.

If it was just a rule 5 pickup it would have looked smart. But it involved trading away a very useful chip. A starting position player for a reliever is just not smart. You can't just couch it as the pursuit of pitching and therefore justify the pursuit no matter the price paid. Relievers are unreliable enough, minor league relievers are a whole different animal. Hinske was nothing special, but he put up some decent numbers during at his best.

As a non 40-man roster guy who is a long way away from ever making any money, and who seemingly turned his career around (if only a little) as a 19-year old in A ball, I could see Beane having interest. If Burke was overvalued, and therefore unattractive to Beane, because he was highly touted for physical tools and due money he probably wasn't worth at draft time, maybe now he's more properly valued. Now that he's just another low-paid prospect whose star has faded, Beane might find it attractive to get a guy like Burke thrown into a trade. Even if he doesn't envision him playing for the A's in the future, Beane knows Hendry is playing for 2008, while Oakland is not. Burke does nothing for the 2008/2009 Cubs, unless he's traded. If he's worth 35 cents, maybe Beane can get him for a quarter and trade him 2-3 years from now for a dollar.

I don't see them having interest in Veal, whose value lies in hope and promise, rather than accomplishment. Given how the Cubs seem so wishy-washy with Wuertz, who has done nothing but perform, I could see them being willing to move him (obviously with others) in the part of the package it would take to get Street. It would be a terribly innefficient use of resources, but that's what Hendry's Cubs are all about. You might as well get as much so-called assured production as you can get if you are going to run the team the way they've run it.

First off, I think you have to wonder who the Cubs have that he'd be interested in. What type of prospects do they have that have been putting up solid minor league numbers at age appropriate levels. I imagine Beane also would be looking for somebody who could throw him some solid innings in 2008, because while it's fine to go young and play for the future, you don't want to get into a situation where 8 or 9 guys are needed to fill out the rotation over the year. Guys like Gallagher, Hart, Marshall, Cedeno, Patterson and Wuertz might be of interest to Beane. I'm not sure Murton, who is a year off from making arbitration money, is somebody he would like, unless he feels he can turn around and trade Matt in a year for significantly more than he paid for him. Given how the Cubs seem to be undervaluing Murton, that may be possible. It's possible Beane could hold some value in a guy like Chirinos. What are Matt Craig and Jake Fox's status? Neither is a blue chipper, but both may be able to put up decent major league numbers for a bit of time (and therefore possibly increase their trade value down the line). Kevin Hart and Mark Holliman may be of interest. I also wonder if he'd have any interest in Kyler Burke.

http://www.winterjade.com/delectation/archives/delectation/102204.ppq.04-thumb.jpg or http://www.bunrab.com/dailyfeed/dailyfeed_images_jan-07/df07_01-08_steak.jpg