davearm2

Once the precedent is set, there is no stopping other teams and players from making similar arrangements. The player's union will not stand for this. Opt out clauses can be found in newer contracts that protect a team or player from uncomfortable situations. Contracts are meant to be honored, and the player's union will fight for the player anytime the contract is not honored, whether it's mutual or not. I don't really disagree with the notion that this won't happen. But I certainly wouldn't characterize it as the player's union "fighting for the player". The context is, Fukudome and the Cubs have a mutually acceptable agreement to terminate the contract, and the MLBPA would stand in the way of it, forcing *both sides* to honor a contract they both want out of. The ARod/Red Sox thing is a good benchmark. ARod wanted to go to Boston, but the MLBPA wouldn't let it happen under the terms BOS, TEX, and ARod all found agreeable. Isn't that kinda the opposite of fighting for a player? Fighting against him more like it.

If you're going to trade both Lilly and Marquis, then you go all-in: let Dempster go for draft picks, and sign Sabathia. As someone else alluded, Hill, Marshall, Gaudin, Samardzija, Hart, Guzman, and whoever else have a cage match in the spring for the last two spots. Can you imagine the look on Brewer fan's face when, after witnessing Sabathia's awesomeness firsthand in the second half of '08, the Brewers still somehow miss the playoffs, the Cubs win the WS, and then to rub it in, sign Sabathia in November?

i'm not sure how you can agree to disagree on something when you're wrong about it. the expected value of putting the ball in play is greater than the expected value of striking out. i'm not taking into account whether dunn would be a better or worse hitter if he played more to contact, but if you have two guys that are exactly equal except one makes 100 "expected outs" (including errors) by putting the ball in play, and the other makes 100 outs by striking out, i'd obviously take the guy who makes the outs by putting the ball in play. Your assumption is wrong. An out is an out. In real world there is "no expected" there is only what happens and what doesn't happen. The way the out happens matters not. If it's the leadoff hitter of the game, then the way the out happens matters not. If it's the bottom of the ninth, bases loaded, game tied, and less than two outs, then the way the out happens matters tremendously. A flyout wins the game. A strikeout leaves it up to the next guy. A DP grounder sends the game to extras. This simple hypothetical is all it takes to defeat the "an out is an out" argument pretty soundly.

Call me crazy, but I can see how sitting on the bench watching a bunch of guys you've been teammates with for a couple months, on a team and city you've got no ties to, try and win a World Series isn't particularly appealing to a guy like Giles. I mean is that the sort of championship experience that he'd cherish for years and years?

I was in the womb with Schlitter. That SOB wouldn't stop splashing amneotic fluid in my eyes and pinching off my cord.

I think that's likely, considering they know he has previously expressed a lack of interest in ever playing there. He went to SD as cheaply as he did (at the time) for a reason, he wanted to be in that area. I don't think he'll change his mind and go to Boston. With that said, if he does decide to enforce his no trade clause, then SD has to pull him back, right? Then if they try to put him on waivers again, it would be unrevocable. If Boston claimed him again, can he refuse without retiring? SD wouldn't technically be trading him, so his no trade clause would be irrelevant, right? It's probably a moot point, SD wouldn't put him on unrevocable waivers and get nothing for him. I think that when another team claims someone on waivers, it's still considered a "trade" whether or not the team gets anything for it. If his no trade clause would apply now when Boston puts in a claim why wouldn't it apply then when Boston puts in a claim. After all, any trade in August is just a swap of guys who are on or have already cleared waivers. My guess is that if a scenario like this happened, Boston would have bought the rights to a player who had no obligation to play for them, and would be sitting on his butt somewhere in SD. However, Boston is probably going to be able to figure out whether or not Giles would actually refuse to play for them by just phoning his agent, and then wouldn't make the claim, unless they really wanted him not to play for Tampa. Because the first claim leads to either a trade or a revocation of waivers. The second claim isn't a trade and can't be revoked. The Pads aren't violating his no trade clause by releasing him the second waiver round.Your first sentence is inaccurate. If a guy is claimed, there are three potential outcomes... not just the two you list. 1 - trade is worked out 2 - player is pulled back 3 - player is allowed to go outright to the team placing the claim AFAIK, any player with a NTC can block #1 and #3, if the team placing the claim is not one he's interested in going to. That is, you can't force a guy with a NTC out of town by trade *or* by the waiver process. The whole point of the NTC is obviously to empower the player to have control over where he's assigned. The waiver process cannot circumvent the player's rights in this respect.

Ever think maybe you've got cause and effect backward?

Yes, just another in a long line of hitters that went on to great things in MLB after escaping the Cubs' farm system. :roll:

No chance Adam Dunn clears waivers.

Never has the term "a picture is worth a thousand words" been more apt.

I don't. Veal can't seem to get his walks under control. Ceda's got his own control issues, but at least he's got nearly unhittable stuff to offset it. Control is definitely a concern - I'm not utterly sold on Ceda though. He's the type of guy I'd like to ship off while his value is really high. which was last offseason I didn't know it had dropped. Yeah terrorizing AA hitters probably isn't hurting Ceda's stock any.

I don't. Veal can't seem to get his walks under control. Ceda's got his own control issues, but at least he's got nearly unhittable stuff to offset it.

Well if this Swisher-for-Street noise has any validity, then maybe the Cubs' angle here is to give the A's some more prospects and get Swisher for themselves.

The thing is, it doesn't necessarily have to take until beyond this season for the effects of such overuse to manifest themselves. When you've got the bullpen the Brewers do, you leave the studs in an extra inning and take your chances.

The Brewers definitely have a tendency to self-destruct. Monday was a prime example... Weeks botching a critical defensive play, and then the bullpen flopping late. As for riding Sheets and Sabathia hard -- why not? They're likely both gone soon. Parra's pitch counts have been reasonable, as were Gallardo's last year.

Ibanez Dunn Manny Bay Folks, these guys are all barely-passable LFs. They ain't RFs, and obviously not CFs. The Cubs have got a LF already, and they're not experimenting with moving him to a new position again. The only acquisition that can possibly make sense would involve a guy that can play CF or RF.

Being traded from the Yankees to the Pirates ought to make those attitude problems disappear.

Part of the reason for including Marquis in the deal is salary. He's owned 7 million next season still, and what...3.5 million still this season? Ted Lilly would be a much more logical choice for a salary-balancer. He's got 2/$24M left after this season, so the margin between that and what Halladay's owed is only around $6M total. Not sure if Lilly left Toronto on good terms or not. Anyway, start with Lilly and Cedeno for Halladay and Eckstein, and then start piling on the young guys. I don't think Toronto will want Lilly after he got into a screaming match with the manager... Of course on the other hand, that manager seemed to have problems getting along with several guys, and besides, he's gone now. I'm not sure we can say one way or another if that bridge is burned.

Part of the reason for including Marquis in the deal is salary. He's owned 7 million next season still, and what...3.5 million still this season? Ted Lilly would be a much more logical choice for a salary-balancer. He's got 2/$24M left after this season, so the margin between that and what Halladay's owed is only around $6M total. Not sure if Lilly left Toronto on good terms or not. Anyway, start with Lilly and Cedeno for Halladay and Eckstein, and then start piling on the young guys.

I suspect the percentage of OHers that overvalue O's players is not particularly dissimilar to the percentage of NSBBers that overvalue Cub players.

Yost is already saying he'll only start Durham 1-2 times per week: http://blogs.jsonline.com/brewers/archive/2008/07/20/yost-defends-weeks.aspx I'd say the fact that he was the #2 overall pick and the way he shot through the Brewers' farm system with ease would lead a lot of people to believe he's been underachieving in the majors, Ned. Perhaps someone needs to recite to Ned some of his own quotes from spring training, when he was predicting a big breakout year for Weeks, building off of his hot finish in '07. So Weeks has underachieved relative to Yost's own stated expectations for him.

Just for sake of discussion, let's imagine the Cubs win it all this year, and final bids are due in November. You're a bidder. Does the WS win motivate you to increase or decrease your bid? Or put another way, does the curse, the 100 years, the lovable losers, the wait til next year, etc. etc., does that stuff add value to the franchise? I think winning does result in a net increase in the franchise value, but also those storylines that go away were adding value.

Folks get rich all the time exploiting market efficiencies. Sounds to me like a person could do pretty well buying the Mariner cards on eBay and reselling them on sportscardforum.com, and buying Yankee/RedSox/Cub product on sportscardforum.com and reselling it on eBay. Heck you could even create eBay listings for cards you don't actually possess (a Soto or an Ellsbury or whatever), but knew you could source quickly and easily for a given price, with the opening bid set X% over your cost. If a bid comes in, then you go get the card, even probably even before the auction ends. Of course, I'm sure this business model has been examined already. :P

One thing that hasn't been pointed out is, this automated/robotic umpire-replacement system not only has to determine every call instantaneously, but there also must be a system to *broadcast* the call to the players on the field instantaneously. The example that immediately comes to mind is the catcher needs to know the ball/strike call in under 1 second when the count is full and a runner is stealing. Both runners and fielders need to know immediately if that sinking liner to left was a catch or a trap. And so on.

Because Fontenot is the preferred back-up at 2B (ahead of Cedeno) and DeRosa is the non-defensive back-up for corner OFs (and sometimes 1B and 3B). In essence, Fontenot backs up three-five positions. I think you could make the case that a clear upgrade to DeRosa as back-up corner OF would step into Fotenot's spot, but it is unlikely to happen. If Hart and Ceda could bring back Blake, I'd do it. He can be very useful if the Cubs are in a position to rest some players in September, and he's the RH DH if they make it to the world series. Hart and Ceda for 2 months of a minor bench upgrade? Ugly.