jersey cubs fan

I was thinking the same thing. It's the new sample size. jesus, what? do you even know what hyperbole means? Um yes, but I'm guessing you don't understand what I'm talking about. Hyperbole has been used a lot as a catch all by people complaining about others complaining about the trade. It's been used inappropriately as well. Similarly, sample size has been used ad nauseum and inappropriately at times on this board.

The NL also went 7-0 on the road in AL stadiums and 11-3 against the AL overall.

I was thinking the same thing. It's the new sample size.

Dontrelle Willis was a successful low level prospect when they traded him away. The guy the Cubs got has been awful in rookie ball and low A ball. Point taken, but if you believe as I do, that the Cubs should be sellers and our next chance to make a solid run at the division will be 2009, the trade makes sense. Getting anything is better than getting nothing for a guy that isn't a part of the Cubs long term plans anyway. I think the Cubs can and should make a solid run at the division in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

You're wrong.

He's been banged up, but he has caught as recently as 2 days ago, I believe.

3.96, and he saw 4.15 pitches last year. His ISOD has always been really good-probably the only thing we know for sure about him is that he is going to walk quite a bit. That sounds good. Maybe this will work out. Its a shame Barrett's Cubs career ended the way it did. It should have been better. He really did some bonehead things recently. As well as prior to recently.

Dontrelle Willis was a successful low level prospect when they traded him away. The guy the Cubs got has been awful in rookie ball and low A ball.

You answered your own question. People are skeptical of his current OBP because his minor league stats indicate its improbable that he will maintain such numbers.

They need offense, and aren't all that worried about a catcher somehow making their pitcher's worse.

You do realize it's tough to judge NINETEEN YEAR OLD minor leaguers based on stats in Low ball right? Man you are the king of hyperbole. You can't be any good putting up stats that bad in low A ball.

Yeah, the Cubs getting cash would make no sense.

I think it's safe to say it's more than a hunch. Barrett was a Hendry guy, perhaps his biggest "I really want him" acquisition. He clashed with Lou. The day he got picked off 2nd, and then went on to argue with Lou in the dugout, as opposed to just taking Lou's criticism, made me think those two were not going to be together long.

I could not agree more with every part of this. I was calling for them to solidify RF and/or SS for next year and let Barrett walk, going with placeholders at C if need be. So, if they swing a deal that solidifies RF and/or SS and stick with these placeholders at C, I won't be upset. But the most important part of all that is solidifying RF and/or SS. The Cubs remain last in the NL in SS OPS, by an extremely wide margin. And Theriot is doing nothing to change that. They are 11th in the NL in RF OPS, but it's still sub 700. More Floyd might bring some stability, but that's still a position of weakness.

Oh, jesus. I should just leave this thread before I end up spending half my day here. Come on...you wanna argue CERA...you know you do...give in to the dark side... Besides, you know you're gonna be here all day anyway.... No way man. I took the day off and am going to the planetarium with a bunch of fine ladies. 8-) you're with some fine ladies and your big idea was the PLANETARIUM? Dear God man, It's dark in there, isn't it?

Possibly a little upside. Catchers do sometimes take more time to develop. But his upside probably gets nowhere near Barrett at his peak. He's probably even a step down from somebody like Damian Miller.

Sounds like a defense and chemistry trade to me, which I don't like. I think they are also sacrificing offense, which they can't afford to do. But I've never really liked Barrett, and I wanted him to walk at the end of the year anyway. At least this pretty much guarantees they don't do something stupid like offer him a longterm contract this November. I don't like that catcher is now manned by nothing but defensive backup kind of catchers. A bunch of 8 hitters on a team already dealing with 8 hitters at SS. I don't think this trade makes the Cubs any better.

I'm no expert either but I believe this isn't particularly fast paced for a college hitter out of bigger conference like Colvin was. But it is still pretty impressive for someone as raw as he is in his first full pro season. He has glaring weaknesses, but as RHIAB points out, he's more likely to fix his plate discipline issues after he's tested at higher levels. Perhaps that could be an interesting side effect, but in an organization so devoid of any real concentration on patience, I doubt that's the motivation. I find this really odd considering he's not even dominating his current league. It would be one thing if he was hitting .380 or something ridiculous and knocking HRs left and right, making it unrealistic for him to try and be patient. But he's barely hitting .300, ranking 13th in the league, and is just 12th in OPS. He's still just 21. Pushing him to AA this early, with just about 500 professional at bats, having already skipped low A (after starting in short season ball), seems incredibly aggressive. You'd have to think they believe he's worthy of a 2008 call-up if he's going to AA now.

In his only AAA time before this year, Murton did this: .353 .421 .500 That year he hit .342 .403 .498 in AA. I would hope that after he's gets himself settled back into the routine of playing everyday, he'll be able to do something along the lines of .325/.415/.500. But I'm not at all suprised that he started slowly, since he looked so out of whack his last couple at bats in the majors. Hopefully Jacque is gone in a couple 2-3 weeks, and then Murton can be back up shortly thereafter.

I'll cheer if it's after the Cubs series.

It's not easy for every GM to eat $5.6M. That's how much the Cubs still owe Eyre for the remainder of 2007 and all of 2008. Its also how much money we are paying Jones per year, or thereabouts. Think about what you could do with the 10M you are paying those 2 bozos. What I could do or what Jim Hendry could do? Jim would just waste it.

Barrett and Kendall are having very different years at the plate. The difference in OPS+ is about 45 points. Barrett is having a disappointing season, but his numbers are on the upswing and he's like to finish the year at least around average, if not solid. Kendall is as big a black hole as the Cubs have had playing regularly in several years.

C FA market is horrific this year. I think the big names are all 36+: LoDuca, Posada, and Pudge. Kendall and Barrett will both be added to that mix as well as a few other 2nd and 3rd tier FA catchers like Melheuse, Ross, etc. Think we would have to go out and find us a prospect or use Hill/Soto/Blanco if Henry can return. Blanco and Soto would be under our control, but i have not looked at the details on Hill's deal. So you want to trade Kendall for Jones straight up, with the Cubs taking back the portion of Kendall's contract the A's still owe him this year ~half of $7.5m. Then trade Barrett for a prospect. This is a huge downgrade in 2007 catcher position, but leaves the Cubs without Jones, Barrett or Kendall on the books for next year, and cleans up OF a little by making Floyd the regular until Murton comes up and splits his time. Benefits to 2007 are upgrade in catcher defense, no more Jones, save a little money. Costs to 2007 are replacing a competent bat with an atrocious one in Kendall. Benefits to 2008 are no more Jones, whatever prospect you get for Barrett. Costs to 2008 are inapplicable, as long as you aren't dumb enough to try and resign Kendall. I'm not sure the A's would want Jones for Kendall, it saves them a little 2007 money but costs them in the longterm. I think replacing Barrett's bat with another black hole in Kendall seriously damages the 2007 lineup and any hope for improvement, and I don't think they can get much of a prospect for Barrett on his own. In 2008 you have to go out and find yourself a stud SS or RF in order to make up for fact that you are going to get nothing from the C position.

Still not getting it, so i will recap it for ya one more time. We trade Jones to the A's for Kendall, clearing 5.6M next year in cap room and fixing the disfunctionality of our OF. We then flip Barrett for a prospect over to the AL. Barrett is probably leaving anyway, so might as well get something for him. The difference between Barrett and Kendall at the moment is 1 WS. We gain 5.6M next year to use either on the FA market or to re-sign Z, v 2.0. Because remember, we may or may not have a 100M payroll depending on the new ownership, so we may need to conserve some cash. Jones is the 6th highest paid player on the Cubs atm and is a waste of talent and money. He is an albatross and his deal is a boondoggle (link for Raisin b/c he obviously gets confused when i use big words http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/boondoggle). Then who is the catcher? That'd be Kendall. In 2008.

Still not getting it, so i will recap it for ya one more time. We trade Jones to the A's for Kendall, clearing 5.6M next year in cap room and fixing the disfunctionality of our OF. We then flip Barrett for a prospect over to the AL. Barrett is probably leaving anyway, so might as well get something for him. The difference between Barrett and Kendall at the moment is 1 WS. We gain 5.6M next year to use either on the FA market or to re-sign Z, v 2.0. Because remember, we may or may not have a 100M payroll depending on the new ownership, so we may need to conserve some cash. Jones is the 6th highest paid player on the Cubs atm and is a waste of talent and money. He is an albatross and his deal is a boondoggle (link for Raisin b/c he obviously gets confused when i use big words http://education.yahoo.com/reference/dictionary/entry/boondoggle). Then who is the catcher?